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. --BDD (talk) 18:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trialome[edit]

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

No evidence at all of notability; appears to be a term coined by one academic, Vojtěch Huser. This Google Scholar search appears to show that no-one else is using it. Article created and maintained by a single editor who may have a COI - discussion at WP:COIN#Trialome. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:53, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- that COIN link is actually WP:COIN#Vojtěch Huser. The article creator and overwhelmingly-largest-contributor, Sakaton, has also inserted a great deal of other links I would call refspam, the majority of which point to other of Huser's papers. This editor was also the creator and primary contributor to the article on Dr. Huser. There are also some IP addresses that have edited both articles that geolocate to the NIH (Dr. Huser's employer). Multiple requests for clarification of the nature of the potential conflict of interest have gone unanswered. Sakaton also appears to be of the opinion that some usage of the term on twitter is enough to establish notability, which I would personally disagree with. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 00:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree, the topic only appears in the publications of one academic group. I could find no independent reliable sources for this topic, so it fails notability guidelines per WP:GNG. The article itself has conflict of interest problems as noted above. A non-notable topic suggests deletion. --Mark viking (talk) 00:41, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:05, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-- The only 2 references not written by Huser do not contain the word "Trialome". PubMed search of keyword "trialome" gives only one hit (written by Huser, and a primary source to boot). Google scholar is getting some 14 results. Some written by Huser, some in ~~Spanish~~Portuguese (not sure what trialome means in ~~Spanish~~Portuguese, but it is recurring along with the word - "tanos" ... suspect it is not the same as this usage of the term), and a few I think are referring to some kind of parasitic infection (?). With this few search results I get the feeling this is a newly coined term, and wikipedia is not the place to promote it. Reliable secondary sources please (from a variety of authors). Also (by no means a valid reason for deletion), I am having difficulty understanding what exactly this term means. Lesion (talk) 03:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: in the Google search linked above, the references in Spanish, Portuguese and Italian to "trialome-tanos" "-tani" etc are to Trihalomethanes, the spelling in those languages being without the "h"s; the parasite is apparently a Google misreading of Triatoma infestans. Obviously, neither topic has any relevance to this article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NEO. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inasmuch as a medical topic should be supported by reliable sources for medicine-related articles, of which there are none supporting the statements in this article -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 02:02, 20 September 2013 (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.