Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chendooram

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:09, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chendooram

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A Siddha medicine but fails GNG comprehensively. Also, see WP:MEDRS. ∯WBG^converse 13:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 13:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 13:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, Zoom! some possible sources: "Standarization of Kantha Chendooram" from Ancient Science of Life, "Chendooram" (brief summation of what it is) from Complementary and Alternative Medicines in Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Approach, "Acute and Sub acute Toxicity Study on Siddha Drug Rasa Chendooram" from International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, "Physico-chemical analysis of Arumuga chendooram" from International Journal of Research in Ayurveda and Pharmacy, "Toxicological Studies of Lingha Chendooram-1; a Siddha Drug" from Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (plenty more out there). Zoom! Coolabahapple (talk) 02:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Coolabahapple, please re-read WP:MEDRS (and esp. this section) which is very very necessary whilst maneuvering in these areas.....

Thus; let's zoom a bit more (5x-?!):--
- Published in a journal of dubious quality; not indexed by MEDLINE. I note that a Pubmed search for the string outputs a few entries over this journal, alone. N
- IJPSR is a predatorial journal. N
- IJRAP is a predatorial journal. N
- IJPS is published by OMICS; which is prob. the most pathetic predatory publisher out there. N
- Now; all that is left is the CRC book and I ask you to seek and read it's reviews (or rather of that series of publications)......:-) ∯WBG^converse 14:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can be redirected to Siddha (which's a mess) or somewhere like that. ∯WBG^converse 14:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for letting us know about the predatory journals (i didnt do any checking on these sources hence the "zoom zoom":)), so it doesnt look good. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sourceless for almost 5 years. Bye Chendooram! Trillfendi (talk) 04:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per the absence of substantive coverage in reliable, intellectually independent sources. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. This is unreferernced/unsupported material that could be anything from OR to junk (or a hoax). Even if the topic was notable, the content is WP:TNT material. There is no point trying to slap a few refs onto contrived cases to get them through AfD, when nobody is going to touch them after and they have no long-term future in WP. Britishfinance (talk) 15:50, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.