Points of interest related to Medicine on Wikipedia: Outline –  History –  Portal –  Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
( talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Medicine. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Medicine|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions ( prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Medicine.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Medicine/archive

See also: Health and fitness-related deletions and Disability-related deletions

Specialty Hospital, Jordan

Specialty Hospital, Jordan (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Previously deleted and salted at Specialty Hospital. The only sources here are press releases, the hospital's self-written description, and some kind of advertorial. I can't find much online for this case. Cleo Cooper ( talk) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Jordan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Function Health

Function Health (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Thrice declined at AfC prior to acceptance. While the search is hard given health functions, a search combined with Hyman's name just brings more publicity and churnalism. I don't see the WP:SIRS depth of sourcing required for WP:CORP. A merger to Mark Hyman (doctor) might be possible as the only co-founder with an article, but not sure that would be DUE. Star Mississippi 00:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, and Companies. Star Mississippi 00:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:SPAM. Although the article has independent references, it's a stub that reads like a promotional pamphlet, with minimal effort made to establish notability beyond one of its co-founders having a Wikipedia article of his own. CoolieCoolster ( talk) 02:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Technology, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Youth Coalition for Organ Donation

Youth Coalition for Organ Donation (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Organization known for a single effort that didn't succeed. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and New York. UtherSRG (talk) 01:49, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Not enough coverage in reliable independent sources to meet WP:NORG/ WP:SIRS. Jfire ( talk) 01:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

One failed measure which was enough to garner local, regional, and national news still meets Wikipedia’s notability standards, but in this case, there was an additional, successful piece of legislation passed in partnership with The YCOD.

Meets notability standards. Evanroden1 ( talk) 16:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 12:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Paulin Basinga

Paulin Basinga (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Appears PROMO. I don't see articles about this individual, only interviews or use of him as an expert on xyz health topic in various media. Odd that all sourcing here is from Nigeria, but none in the home country, possible "pay to publish" as we see typically in Nigerian media. I have my concerns, bringing ti AfD to discuss. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Rwanda. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I oppose!

In the beginning, I read about him and his works. For clarification, it may seem to be promo but factually it is not.

In facts, connectively, I read that in the home country he was a university lecturer, researcher and consultant. These can be limits to his articles other than interviews or use of him as an expert. But I considered it notable because he featured on international articles including those of World Bank and BMGF. It is referenced that later on, he has featured on other institutions such as Global Citizen and UGHE.

I do not see any problem with sources from Nigeria because based on reliable sources, it shows that his work in leadership role at BMGF were about Africa and the biggest office there was in Nigeria.

However, If we test him in Rwanda, below are some articles about him but there are in Kinyarwanda;

• https://mobile.igihe.com/amakuru/u-rwanda/article/dr-paulin-basinga-yahawe-kuyobora-bill-melinda-gates-foundation-ishami-rya
• https://igihe.com/amakuru/u-rwanda/article/live-rwanda-day-yatangiye-i-washington-dc-amafoto

Thanks. 6eeWikiUser ( talk) 18:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Oaktree b, a drive-by comment: are you insinuating that "pay-to-publish" determines the nature of Nigeria media. I can't see much coverage if not two from Nigerian source. Don't you think it's below the belt?
  Back to deletion discussion! —  Safari Scribe ^{Edits! Talk!} 08:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  I'm not sure, we see it all too often here in AfD; Nigerian and Indian media seem to have a history of publishing iffy articles on people with no relation to the country. When I see an article that's only sourced to Nigerian media when the subject doesn't have a connection to the country (or a partial connection), it's a red flag. Oaktree b ( talk) 14:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  I never knew the story about Nigerian and Indian media, and I think we should not easily globalize because from this subject, mathematically, the sources from Nigerian media are less than 30%. 6eeWikiUser ( talk) 11:23, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Paulin Basinga publications

Paulin Basinga publications (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

There is no reason to have a list of someone's publications on Wikipedia, this is what Google Scholar and Research Gate etc are for. Since a PROD was contested, it has to go to AfD (perhaps speedy delete). This page should not be merged to Paulin Basinga as a long list is not useful in a BLP. Ldm1954 ( talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 ( talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete: it's odd that the article about the person isn't linked, but they have one. This list isn't needed, and I have my doubts the individual is notable either. Most ref's in their article seem to be interviews in Nigerian media, none from his home country. Suspect more "pay to publish" notability... Oaktree b ( talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment: I've also nominated the article on Paulin Basinga for deletion, does not appear notable either. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete, WP:NOPAGE; the publication list is on Scopus and other databases, linked from Paulin Basinga, and doesn't warrant a separate page. I agree that a merge is unwarranted, as the content is no needed on that page (MOS). Klbrain ( talk) 18:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete: per nom and Klbrain. Suprised there isn't a speedy criteria for this, but after the declined PROD, this (and not merge) is the right choice. If the author wants access to it to improve the Paulin Basinga page they should draftify/user-space it now. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Klbrain. hinnk ( talk) 04:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Gabriel Mendoza Gagnier

Gabriel Mendoza Gagnier (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Regarding GNG, none of the references really even cover him much less be of GNG scope. Regarding SNG, it basically covers routine participation in three areas. North8000 ( talk) 13:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Sportspeople, Animal, Medicine, Horse racing, and Mexico. Skynxnex ( talk) 15:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Keller Rinaudo Cliffton

Keller Rinaudo Cliffton (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The article has many issues for a BLP and feels like a WP:SPIP. The article already has a resume-like alert and the puffery alert (which is dated from 2021).

I would also argue that on the notability of this subject. This person's notability is not inherented to them by association with their company. The company is notable and has high quality representation in Wikipedia.

There are also a number of details that are not cited in this article and our major issue for BLP. Many of the citations also do not match facts in the source (example: cite in personal life). One source is just "Department of Construction Management & Civil Engineering" without any sort of information to detail whether this source is a publication, a website, etc.

Ew3234 ( talk) 19:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Ew3234 ( talk) 19:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine, Technology, Aviation, Arizona, California, and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Shauna Vollmer King

Shauna Vollmer King (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:BLP of a writer and organizational founder, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria. As always, neither writers nor founders of organizations are automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source media coverage about their work -- but this is referenced entirely to glancing namechecks of her existence as a provider of soundbite in articles about other things or people, which is not what it takes: we're not looking for sources in which she speaks about someone or something else, we're looking for sources that are about her.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to show much, much better sourcing than this. Bearcat ( talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United States of America. Bearcat ( talk) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete. A BEFORE search turns up no sources that pass GNG. Dclemens1971 ( talk)

• Keep. This person is notable. Upon seeing a few sources like The Denver Post, one of the major news publishers. You can see a full detailed paragraph is covered.

"Shauna King, president of International Medical Relief, said about 20 people will go on this mission, including doctors, nurses, medical students, a disaster and refugee trained psychologist and Kelly. Several more have applied, King said, such as oral surgeons and other medical providers.

International Medical Relief dispatched a crew to Lesvos over a month ago to organize lodgings, a clinic station, transportation and line up interpreters.

Roughly 1,500 refugees arrive in Lesvos on overloaded boats on a daily basis, King said, and most are there temporarily." Larvatiled ( talk) 05:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

King is referenced in a single paragraph of a much longer local human-interest story ( here's the link; actually published in the weekly local Broomfield Enterprise, a sub-brand of the Post but not the Post itself) focused on a local resident going on an International Medical Relief trip. All it says about King is that she is president of IMF; it quotes her speaking to other topics but contains no additional details that would help us know why she is notable. It is by definition a WP:TRIVIALMENTION and thus not appropriate to establish notability. Dclemens1971 ( talk) 13:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Karin Vogel

Karin Vogel (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

No evidence of any notability. A reporter did some OR and identified what he thought was the last in the line of succession. In reality the lne of succession is almost infinite, if one whole line died out the rules allow succession to be tracked back to earlier monarchs and through wider family connections. This is just trivial nonsense. Was PRODed and dePRODded before, hence this AfD. Fails WP:GNG   Velella   ^{Velella Talk}   13:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Germany.   Velella   ^{Velella Talk}   13:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. 13:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC) Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Notability is established by all the media coverage already cited in the article, including an article in The Wall Street Journal. Contrary to the nominator's claim, the line of succession is distinctly finite. It consists only of descendants of Sophia of Hanover. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete: Interesting human interest story, but without much more, I don't see notability. Medical therapist interviewed a decade ago with nothing since, I don't see sustained coverage. Oaktree b ( talk) 13:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment: 4972nd in line, if that helps. Could be a one line mention in an article about the monarchy, but that's all. Oaktree b ( talk) 13:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Merge into Succession to the British throne, a sentence on the lines of "In 2011 it was reported that some genealogists had stated that therapist Karin Vogel, from Rostoock, Germany, was then the 4,972nd and last in the line of succession." with the various sources. (The WSJ seems to be the core report, but is pay-walled so I can't see it). Seems an encyclopedia-worthy snippet of reporting, but not enough to give her an article of her own. Pam D 21:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  Looking more carefully at Succession to the British throne I note that the list on which she appears is mentioned and referenced, as is the update 10 years later where she was again in last place, this time at 5,753. I have added her name and a couple of her refs to that article. I now think we can just Redirect to Succession to the British throne#Current line of succession. Pam D 22:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  By the way, the reporters were not "doing OR" as asserted by the nominator: they were reporting on a report by a notable genealogist William Addams Reitwiesner who had compiled what he asserted to be a complete list (and yes, it is a finite set of people because of the requirement that they be descendants of Sophia, although this list is over-inclusive as it doesn't check for "in communion with the Church of England"!). Pam D 22:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete or Redirect. WP:ONEEVENT. DrKay ( talk) 06:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete or Redirect. Stub with limited opportunity for growth. 66.99.15.163 ( talk) 16:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The Healthy Mummy

The Healthy Mummy (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This is odd. It appears to have been created over a re-direct for an Australian school. It's also a complete advert. KJP1 ( talk) 10:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. KJP1 ( talk) 10:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, Websites, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  I updated the Healthy Mummy page and updated its history. Regarding the school page I never realised it was still in my sandbox until I went to try create a new article was advised by another member in the chat to do what I did regarding moving it out of the sandbox and creating a new article. Regarding sandbox history probably not the correct way to do things due to a new user error but no ulterior motive. Wozza369 ( talk) 22:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Comment - Leaning delete. The page definitely is in poor shape, but I do note that it is not just a website, and that "Healthy Mummy" seems to have published multiple books. It is, in fact, a business and the founder is described as an entrepreneur and WP:NCORP are the appropriate guidelines here. At this stage I don't thing it meets WP:SIRS but will leave it a bit longer to complete searches or see what others find. Regarding the weird history, however, it appears that the editor who created this also created the school article in their sandbox. They copied the school article into place (and it looks in good shape on first glance), but then they blanked the sandbox and created this, but moved the sandbox to the new page, thus preserving the sandbox history in this article's history. Not the best, and clearly confusing, but ultimately nothing to see there. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  I have updated the page and the history. Regarding my "weird history" I was not aware that the school page was still in my sandbox until I went to create a new article. I was advised in the chat by another member how to remove it from my sandbox and create a new article - which is what I did, perhaps incorrectly. I don't even know how to move sandbox to a new page (obviously I did so unknowingly), however no ulterior motive or malice intended just newbie error. Wozza369 ( talk) 23:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  Fine on the article's origins, but it is still highly promotional. "Healthy Mummy empowers mums to create a healthier lifestyle for themselves and their families through small, sustainable changes" / "The Healthy Mummy offers an integrated suite of recipes, fitness programs, and nutrition products for mothers with young children." / "make healthy living even easier and more convenient for busy women and mums". All in Wikipedia's voice, with the last sourced to two interviews with the CEO, and even then not really supported. It reads like an advert. KJP1 ( talk) 04:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Weak Keep: The sources talking about the financing are fine, but we need more. This [1] gives context on how the website is used, [2] and [3] seem to cover the website and the founder. Oaktree b ( talk) 15:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete On the basis the topic is a company, GNG/ WP:NCORP applies and requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company*. "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria, they simply regurgitate announcements, relying entirely on information provided by the company or execs, there is no "Independent Content", fails ORGIND. The two references posted by Oaktree b above all rely entirely on interviews with the founder or stuff she posted on social media, also failing both CORPDEPTH and ORGIND. HighKing ⁺⁺ 20:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk) 17:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete - It is going to have to be delete. I cannot find sources that meet WP:SIRS at a level of significant coverage that meets WP:CORPDEPTH. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 18:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Delete - as per above. And it’s an advert. KJP1 ( talk) 19:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC) Technically, as the nominator that already counts as a delete !vote, so this is a duplicate. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

  Apologies - this is the second AfD/Review of AfD mistake I’ve made. I’m just not very familiar with the process. I wasn’t sure, as a re-list, whether my original nomination counted. KJP1 ( talk) 17:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete. I'm sure any quality issues are unintentional, we all try the best we can, but it just shows it's pretty much impossible to write an acceptable article with the sourcing that exists for this subject. Alpha3031 ( t • c) 15:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Ballmer Peak

Ballmer Peak (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not notable - the article is a 3 sentence stub about a joke from an xkcd comic, with two of the three sources used being from xkcd itself and the xkcd wiki. Doing a google search, it appears that there's little else about the topic besides the Observer article, outside of blog posts and other self-published sources. — Chevvin 22:54, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Delete: Distillery using this name, nothing for the web comic/meme thing that this article is about. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b ( talk) 23:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge into a section in Xkcd due to being notable enough for one source. Not notable enough for an article. -1ctinus📝 🗨 23:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Merge into the Xkcd article for reasons stated above: that multiple sources are used suggests the topic is notable enough for inclusion. RyanAl6 ( talk) 23:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Changing opinion to Strong Keep after the previously made points. As said before, the sources meet the notability guidelines but the topic would be difficult to smoothly integrate into the Xkcd article. RyanAl6 ( talk) 11:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect: The page Alcohol-related brain damage covers the idea of the Ballmer Peak pretty well. Bluehalooo ( talk) 23:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Ballmer Peak is not mentioned at the proposed redirect target. Normally redirects should be mentioned at the target. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 00:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The Ballmer Peak is a humorous and intentionally incorrect claim contradicting the Alcohol-related brain damage page. It makes no sense as a redirect to there. Dan Bloch ( talk) 01:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

It's not clear it's wrong. We have academic studies to that effect... Hobit ( talk) 14:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Webcomics and Computing. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Strong delete – There's nothing here, just a single study and report that uses the term. Should not be merged into xkcd either, that article already struggles with the many things that grew out of xkcd over the years. (The Observer article technically doesn't even really mention the webcomic btw). This topic probably doesn't meet medical inclusion criteria; it's quite serious to tell people (based on just a single study) that drinking alcohol can make you productive. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 07:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• As argued above, Merge is obviously the right choice. Athel cb ( talk) 09:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Strong keep
  • [4] is an academic study which news reports [5] [6] have entire articles reporting on wrt this term.
  • [7] is another study which looks at the same issue and references the topic.
  • There are plenty of reliable, independent news articles which define the term. For example Tech Crunch and Venture Beat.
  • There are books which define and explain the term. For example How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization, Do Zombies Dream of Undead Sheep? and The Healthy Writer.

This has an academic paper, two news articles that cover that academic paper and many many many other references including books and another academic study. Way over our inclusion guideline. Hobit ( talk) 14:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• • @ Hobit: That's a few more sources than I found. I'm worried if these tech sources and pop-science books don't meet WP:MEDRS... ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 19:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Fair, but I don't think that bar is a bit high for an article covering a meme, even if the meme is health related. The point here isn't that it's true, the point is that it's a notable idea. And we prove notability by sources. But Medicine is something I've only edited a bit around here, so I'll defer to the experts. Hobit ( talk) 20:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

      WP:MEDRES isn't relevant because this is not a medical article. Per the lead sentence: "The Ballmer Peak is a humorous concept..." Dan Bloch ( talk) 21:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply

      • Then why are we citing scientific studies? The Observer article seems to be presenting fairly direct advice: drinking alcohol can in fact increase your productivity. I recognize that this is humorous, but to me that makes it a scarier vector for misinformation. "We wouldn't have an article on this if it wasn't funny" would be a really bad sign. For the record, however, I don't quite know and also want to defer to someone with more experience in that field. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 14:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 19:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC) reply
• Merge: leaning delete. I don't think there's any argument that the above sources qualify this for GNG through SIRS. Let's stick to our scope and leave this to urban dictionary and the like. Draken Bowser ( talk) 09:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply
  • @ Draken Bowser: Could you clarify how they don't meet SIRS? The books are are fairly short (a paragraph) but define the term with a bit of history so may well be significant. The other parts are clearly met as far as I can see. The news articles meet all 3. The research papers could be argued to be primary I guess, but "Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event". They are close to *an* event (their research) but are secondary in this context. Basically asking for you to document why you think GNG isn't met when we have 7 sources listed. Hobit ( talk) 12:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

    I consider it insufficient. Unless ctrl+f fails me it's not mentioned in all of the sources, and included in one merely as an efn. Draken Bowser ( talk) 12:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

    The bar is "multiple". It is mentioned in all but one. And that one is referenced by 2 of the others as being about this topic. Two of the sources are solely on the topic (with the name). Two (the papers) cover the notion in detail but only one references it by name. The three books all discuss it by name. Hobit ( talk) 17:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Question – If merged into xkcd, what would the addition looks like. Would it be included in the "Academic research" section and say something like "A hypoethsized phenomenon linking alcohol consumption and productivity is named after an xkcd joke, the "Ballmer Peak""? Would such an addition be appropriate? ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 10:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I see lots of opinions but no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC) reply

An automatically generated list of proposed deletions and other medicine-related article alerts can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Article alerts, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology/Article alerts, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Neuroscience/Article alerts

• Periowave (via WP:PROD on 13 September 2023)
• Biopôle (via WP:PROD on 12 September 2023)

• Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2019 February 1