Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Citric acid intolerance

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citric acid intolerance[edit]

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

I think this page is all original research. I could find no paper in google scholar, pubmed, or scopus about citric acid intolerance. Apinkcupboard (talk) 16:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are some book and scholar sources for "citric acid allergy" (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL). Nothing pubmed though. --Lambiam 21:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This could be moved to Citric acid allergy, userfied, or cleaned up. There are popular-medicine stories about Citric acid intolerance -- but it does not appear to be recognized by the literature. The rest is original research. Bearian (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 18:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article itself admits, right in the lead sentence, that this supposed syndrome is "little known". That's pretty much the definition of non-notable or not well established, isn't it? The only evidence offered to support this concept is a couple of websites where "some people" report various vague reactions under what are clearly uncontrolled circumstances. --MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a recognised medical condition. Even as an unrecognised medical condition that some people think they have, it's not notable.--Pontificalibus (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2012 (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.