Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NicoBloc

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NicoBloc[edit]

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

Looks like spam, no decent references. Written like advertising. No evidence it reduces health risks. A dangerous article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the statement that it is written like advertising, but I think the article could be sourced and made NPOV. It looks like there are some interesting mentions in journal articles (click on "scholar" above) that could describe the product neutrally and make the article less "dangerous". Jonesey95 (talk) 00:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and it can be summed up as "There is no evidence for its use[1] and thus its use is not recommended.[2]" Does not need an article for this. Could be one line at smoking cessation. Anyway have trimmed :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have more or less merged here [3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:07, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete advertising, potential sham treatment -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 07:05, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with Doc James, we should not have this even as a debunk. No significant coverage found. Google Scholar citations are minimal. --MelanieN (talk) 02:21, 29 July 2013 (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.