Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4-Ethylamphetamine

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 22:49, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4-Ethylamphetamine[edit]

[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)

4-Ethylamphetamine does not appear to be a notable chemical compound. (All chemicals must meet WP:GNG to be included.) Although there are a few auto-generated database listings for this chemical, a Chemical Abstracts search turns up no sources in the chemical literature about this chemical compound. As far as I can tell, all mentions of "ethylamphetamine" refer to the related compound N-ethylamphetamine instead. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So @Edgar181:, I'm not an Orgo expert, but isn't 4-Ethylamphetamine simply an isomer of N-Ethylamphetamine, or Etilamfetamine? Utopes (talk) 23:21, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Utopes: 4-Ethylamphetamine and N-Ethylamphetamine (etilamfetamine) are isomers in the sense that they have the same molecular formula (C₁₁H₁₇N), but each has a different arrangement of atoms. As such, they are considered different, distinct chemical compounds. There are also more known chemical compounds with the same molecular formula. Some are notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article and are listed at C11H17N; many others are not notable enough to have Wikipedia article. I'm proposing that 4-Ethylamphetamine falls into the group that are not notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:49, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~. Comment. Of course 4-Ethylamphetamine and Etilamfetamine are different compounds. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a meaningless argument for keeping an article. One article merely being a different subject than another article isn't a reason to keep it. Articles must meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. ChemNerd (talk) 14:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can keep it as a derivative of more notable 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine. My very best wishes (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I think that's a meaningless argument for keeping an article. I could imagine hundreds of different derivatives of 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine. What would make any of them worthy of a Wikipedia article? ChemNerd (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a simple analogue of amphetamine, this specific compound does appear in a number of studies/publications, such as [1], [2],[3] and others (not in the abstracts), and therefore can be kept. My very best wishes (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to two out of three of those papers (de Jong et al and Katagi et al), you are mistaken. The compound mentioned is actually N-ethylamphetamine, not 4-ethylamphetamine. In the third paper (Caspar et al), 4-ethylamphetamine gets barely a passing mention in a listing of many chemical compounds. I don't see how that establishes notability. ChemNerd (talk) 15:54, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found mentioning of specifically "4-ethylamphetamine" (not N-ethylamphetamine, 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine, etc.) in this sources using Google Scholar (there were more such sources) and did not check the actual articles. But whatever. The compound is not terribly important. My very best wishes (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Through a search of the scientific literature, I can find nothing to suggest that this chemical meets Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. ChemNerd (talk) 14:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Chilling (talk) 22:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. per the arguments of ChemNerd and Edgar, who are demonstrated subject experts.--Smokefoot (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I found one other literature hit for this structure (by SciFinder structure search): doi:10.1002/ps.2780440406 discusses its synthesis. I don't currently have full-text access to that article to know if it's just a bunch of analogs or reaction examples vs actually discussing the this specific compound in any notable way. ~~So hold for a day or two while I look for a library with it.~~ DMacks (talk) 18:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In this paper, a few dozen target chemical compounds were prepared. 4-Ethylamphetamine appears as an intermediate in the synthesis of just one them. I'll email you a copy of the paper. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:58, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- delete per that mere passing mention. DMacks (talk) 18:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

delete It just appears in literature as a one-liner or part of a generic statement with R=C2H5, so we don't need a whole article either. We can leave it so that Wikidata can record index and registry numbers if that is all that's known. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SNOW, subject to re-creation if and when it becomes notable. Bearian (talk) 13:29, 30 July 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.