Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lyprinol

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lyprinol[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)

Article was blanked and redirected back in 2011, but term is not mentioned at redirect target. Not sure if a stand-alone article is appropriate, or if there is content that can be merged, or if deletion is the best course of action. Another possibility is to redirect to TVNZ#Conflicts, where it is mentioned. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Health and fitness, Products, Biology, Medicine, and New Zealand. Skynxnex (talk) 23:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect. I don't think there's any useful content here. In its current state the article violates WP:NPOV and appears to basically be an advertorial. The only coverage of the product itself I can find is about the prosecution of the firm behind the product for claiming it was a possible cure for cancer. Some of this could be mentioned on the New Zealand green-lipped mussel page. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:04, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Updated - These are the article updates I completed: 1. Added "Clinical studies" section title (shortened lead). 2. De-orphaned this article with wikilink at Lipoxygenase article. I'm not sure if these changes are sufficient to rescue from deletion. Since the topic is outside my knowledge, I will leave that decision to the experts. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 01:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is it possible to Redirect this article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (as nom) Can a sourced mention be added to New Zealand green-lipped mussel (whether a partial merge or not) as mentioned by Chocmilk03? It seems like yes, and I would not be opposed. It was suggested this is related to PCSO-524 in a current discussion at redirects for discussion with link to a source provided. Conceivably, the best WP:ATD here is to mention both and redirect to the mussell article, as these terms both refer to an extract from that species. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: thanks Mdewman6 for the further comment; I've updated my vote to 'delete and redirect' (from delete). The page should be deleted and replaced with a redirect to the Perna canaliculus (New Zealand green-lipped mussel) page. I've added reference to that article to the TVNZ issue and that article also covers medicinal claims to an extent.

Medicine isn't my area of expertise but I've had a look at WP:MEDRS and think there aren't really any reliable secondary sources, apart from possibly the one 2011 literature review cited (and I'm not sure if that's from a reliable journal, but it appears to make the very reasonable conclusion that there's limited evidence). I can only otherwise find primary studies, several of which are funded by Pharmalink, the company that makes Lyprinol. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 03:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment needs someone with a medicines research background to look at this. The attached link seems to imply that there are papers from researchers that have been published on the subject - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163099/ NealeWellington (talk) 10:09, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Many (all?) of the statements in the text are either not referenced or mention experiments that are animal work or individual clinical trials. None of these meet the Wikipedia reference standards described at WP:MEDRS. This is an unproven dietary supplement with a lot of hand-waving and froth, without valid confirming evidence. David notMD (talk) 14:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The company website http://www.lyprinol-arthritis.com/ does not list any human trials conducted/completed after ~2006. Dietary supplements are not required to be effective in order to be Wikipedia-notable, but in my opinion as an expert consultant to the dietary supplement industry (retired 2020), this article - with no valid references - should be deleted. Any mention of Lyprinol or other green-lipped mussel extract products can be covered at [[Perna canaliculus]], with a redirect for those who search Wikipedia for Lyprinol. David notMD (talk) 18:21, 11 September 2023 (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.