Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS)
- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Follicle Nutrient Deficiency Syndrome (FNDS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can find no scholarly references using GScholar and even a general GSearch returns hits mostly connected to a company called Biologix Hair. My suspicion is that this is non-notable, promotional and probably medical quackery but freely admit that my experience of medical/science articles on Wikipedia is limited. Sitush (talk) 09:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I agree with the nominator. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 10:18, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - No good independent media coverage. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As '2020' says at http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?s=0a579df5f09e2ddb06a2c1a62516d1d3&p=69666#post69666 how is it that hair on top of your head gets starved of nutrients but the rest grows quite well? This isn't mentioned on quackwatch so far as I can see; if it were, that might be a sign of notability. As it is, I can't find anything either. Lack of reliable independent sources is more important here than the actual possibilities of successful treatment. The article does have very reliable independent sources, but they are about baldness, not this treatment. I would dispute the claim that this is the 'only' treatment - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002160/ lists two. One needs to be applied on a continuous basis and loss is slowed in 'many men', and a more effective one, which can have unfortunate side effects... Peridon (talk) 11:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Sounds like the latest in a long line of quack treatments for male pattern baldness. Peridon, you reminded me of an old joke. Barber tries to talk customer into having his hair "singed" instead of cut, saying that cutting weakens the hairs. Customer says "so how come I've been cutting my beard every day for 50 years and it grows as strongly as ever?" Barber says "Very simple explanation. You just aren't the kind of person that story was made up to tell to." --MelanieN (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC) (Sorry!)[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.