Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugeroic (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 18:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Eugeroic
AfDs for this article:
Invented pharmacological category. This article was AFD'ed previously and the vote was keep, with most editors noting that it seemed like a worthwhile dictdef. But nobody noticed that "Eugeroic" is not used in the medical literature (see the article). This is an invented term and not a class of drugs. Since this fact was not mentioned in the previous AFD, I'm nominating this fake class of drugs for AFD again. Tempshill (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Delete Non-notable neologism. The term is recently created slang. It does not represent a scientific or medical classifaction of pharmacological agents. Dgf32 (talk) 20:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per Dgf ^ flaminglawyerc 03:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. This word has a wiktionary entry and I have no problem with that (in fact it could be expanded using the lead para of this article). It's not an accepted separate class of drugs though so it not suitable for an encyclopedia. The WHO ATC/DDD Index 2008 classifies these drugs as "centrally acting sympathomimetics" or "Other psychostimulants and nootropics" and Template:Psychostimulants, agents used for ADHD and nootropics already contains both those categories. I think we should stick to these categories used by the WHO. The main thing these "eugeroic" drugs seem to have in common is that they're all marketed by the same company. Qwfp (talk) 12:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Enough problems with discussions on real drugs and their effects (homoepathy, anyone?), don't need made-up drugs.King Pickle (talk) 19:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: Just to be clear that I think having articles on the individual drugs is fine, it's only this "category" I think should be deleted. Qwfp (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- 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.

