Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Testosterone replacement therapy in MMA

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Testosterone replacement therapy in MMA

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

-- CFCF 🍌 (email) 18:44, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:15, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merely stating delete or keep with no rationale is not helpful in building consensus. Consensus is not achieved by counting up votes. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 17:46, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 08:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It would be helpful if the reasoning to the nomination was given - it is not obvious to me.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Assume due to the nature of the sources (seems to be some blogs in there), and the how to manual tone in the intro. I don't think MEDRS applies anywhere in this article since there are no medical claims. Seems fairlyn niche topic,maybe it could be trimmed and merged to the MMA main article? Matthew Ferguson (talk) 17:46, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Non-RS sources can and should be trimmed out and the tone can be modified -neither is a good reason for deletion. In my opinion the MMA article itself is way too large and should be trimmed/out-forked in its own right. Not really relevant to this article I know but I am still struggling to form an opinion on this one - looking at it from a martial arts project perspective.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, none of the sources are salvageable, they are neither RS nor MEDRS compliant. This should be a speedy delete. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 21:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I really am sitting on the fence for this one but I take exception to the statement that none of the sources are reliable. The references talk about which MMA fighters are taking the route and what the effect is on the MMA world. Nothing in the article gives medical advice so the specific MEDRS does not really apply. Is the subject important enough for a stand alone article (shrug).Peter Rehse (talk) 09:26, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MEDRS applies to any medical-related information. Not advice.-- CFCF 🍌 (email) 09:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that claiming MEDRS applies to this article is stretching the point. The article makes does not provide medical information about TRT other than the bald statement of what it is - a one liner, which links to the Wikipedia article, although the reference it uses does not appear to mention it. Other than that it is all sports politics. Maybe the title suggests more than the article provides. If the title was to be changed to more accurately reflect the non-medical tone of the contents, perhaps the problem would go away? • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 15:29, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The question of whether there is enough reason to justify the existence of the article is another issue. At present I would say not, the material could be merged into another article on MMA dealing with what is or should be allowed. Merge and redirect may be the way to go. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 15:36, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MEDRS doesn't apply to articles, it applies to information. If there is any medical information in an article it applies to that information. If anyone wants to take something from this article and add it to an MMA article, sure, but there should be no redirect. I was treating this as if it would be merged to Androgen replacement therapy, which none of the information would belong at. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 15:39, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are no health claims here, medrs does not apply. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence 1 is a health claim "Testosterone replacement therapy is a treatment that fighters may choose to undergo if they have a testosterone deficiency" -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 18:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where you are coming from, but this really is pretty over the top to say MEDRS is needed for this sentence. There is no statement of efficacy. Just stating that some individuals in this sport do this. Matthew Ferguson (talk) 20:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but there is not even an RS source given, just a link to the Cleveland clinic's main page. -- CFCF 🍌 (email) 21:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 03:38, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Medical articles are not in my areas of interest, but it does look like the topic has received coverage. The article could probably be trimmed. I don't know that MEDRS needs to apply to the fact that some MMA fighters used this therapy. I'm leaning towards a weak keep, but I haven't actually taken a good look at the sources yet.Mdtemp (talk) 16:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 09:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per 'CFCF' "the sources are neither RS nor MEDRS compliant. This should be a speedy delete." … I don't understand how anyone could think this MEDRS-exempt, the article is clearly describing a 'treatment'. The MEDRS people should have the last word on this one. Pincrete (talk) 21:34, 7 September 2015 (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.