Talk:Anti-obesity drug

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

from VfD:

Is there a need for an article on this self explanatory entry ? Aside, the article is not precise: a drug do not necessarily take the form of a pill. Gtabary 09:44, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I think this article really does not qualify for VfD. The title is OK. Redirect to Obesity#Treatment and be done with it. --Gene s 10:49, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Sub-Beavis and Butthead snickering about obesity. Delete unless someone is volunteering to perform cleanup. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 11:09, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC) Keep. Thanks to Rossami! Excellent work. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 19:07, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Redirect to obesity. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 11:52, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
• Fatis bad for you but some chicks love it. Fat on chicks is ugly cause you don't know what crack you are hitting when having sex<- is not encyclopedic, or half--ways civil. Delete - rernst 12:28, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Redirect to obesity - LiquidXY 15:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: No need for a redirect to preserve the glorious edit history of this kiddie litter. If recreated, speedy delete. If recreated after that, speedy and ban contributor. The article is not encyclopedic, accurate, or appropriate. Geogre 15:16, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to Anti-obesity drugs, with the auto-redirect from this spot. The contents of the saved article use the appropriate grammatical number; so should the title. Geogre 21:44, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Redirect is pointless, anyone searching for this will find obesity without this redir. Article appears to be a joke by several anons; No version of it contains any useful content. Andrewa 15:17, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep (change of vote). Now a good stub. Still not the best article title IMO, but a remarkable save, well done. Andrewa 14:42, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete DCEdwards1966 15:30, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. How is this different from Anorectic? -- Scott UNIQ362ca41c4649ba06-math-0000342B-QINU 19:09, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • Anorectics would be a subset of the larger class of drugs potentially used to treat obesity. Anorectics interfere with appetite. Other drugs could, for example, leave the appetite intact but increase the metabolism or interfere with the absorption of nutrients. This is a requested article from Pharmacology. However, after removing the nonsense, what's left is self-evident from the title of the article. Weak delete because I believe it is more likely that someone seeing the redlink at Pharmacology will contribute a quality article than that someone seeing the blue link will take the time to edit this sub-stub. Rossami (talk) 01:58, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • After thinking about it, the answer to Scott's question might be appropriate in the article and might raise it above the sub-stub level. Weak keep. Rossami (talk) 02:17, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. It's still only a stub. Someone could expand it to something useful... P Ingerson 00:52, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. User:Rossami at 02:14 on 10 Dec 2004 expanded it into a sensible-loooking article. (Note to the unknowledgeable: "anorectic" does not come from "anus" and "rectum" but from Greek an- = "not" and oreg- = "extend, reach".) Anthony Appleyard 07:25, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep the article as it is by 10:00, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC) is now of interest. Thanks User:Rossami :-) Gtabary 10:02, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep now. Kappa 14:55, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Yet another good save. If this gets deleted in its present state I will personally take it to Votes for Undeletion. [[User:GRider|GRider\^talk]] 18:35, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Another strong keep. This went from rambling, incoherent dicdef to a real, live article. Barnstars for Rossami!! - Lucky 6.9 23:19, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• keep. Mikkalai 08:45, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• keep. Yuckfoo 09:12, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Title

Would "Anti-Obesity Drugs" be a better title for this article? --Measure 23:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)