Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mithridate

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 of the debate was speedy keep after rewrite. – Alphax ^τεχ 04:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mithridaticum

Seems like just nonsense. -- Egil 00:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Blank and Rewrite. The text is incorrect. According to several websites turned up through Google, Mithridaticum is a concotion made from dozens of different poisons designed to enhance the body's immunity to said poisons. I believe that competent research would make this a very interesting article. As it now stands, this seems like an advert for someone marketing something by the name of Mithridaticum. Google Book search on Mithridaticum Arviragus 00:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Expand (full rewrite) per Arviragus. "Kills 89% of recreational users"... hey, where can I get some after a hard night on the AfD pages? Barno 00:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." (Nietzsche according to Star Trek.) Barno 00:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - nonsense, and even a re-write will just be a glorified dicdef. Ruby 01:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nonsense. --NaconKantari e|t||c|m 03:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, per Endomion (Ruby) and Naconkantari. -Rebelguys2 04:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Ruby. --Terence Ong 10:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Incorrect text, but subject is interesting. Leave requests at pages for users who suggested rewrite and at chemical/medical WikiProjects Mgm|^(talk) 10:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It seems like nonsense.--Adam ^{User_talk:Kungfuadam|talk]])} 13:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Keep now that it is rewritten.--Adam ^(talk) 18:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete complete bollocks, but post request as MgM suggests (so no surprises there, then). Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 14:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep Hold your horses guys, which ones of you spent time to research this? First of all I'd like to point out that this is a latin word. Second I'd like to point out that anything non-english is hard to come by on the internet, trust me. Third, don't jump to conclusions and assume good faith. Now to the important part, there's two significant sources I was able to find, one is from about.com (from those of you who dont know, about hires experts to write on subtopics), here's the link: [1]. There is a more detailed explanation here: [2] With time this article just like the other ones will grow, for now KEEP it and have it transwikified to wiktionary. —This user has left wikipedia 16:15 2006-01-25
• Strong keep with rewrite. Above comment seconded. It takes trifling work to find Mithridaticum mentioned both on Wikipedia (see Mithridates VI of Pontus and Theriacum Andromachi) and on Google. The AFD'd content is crap, but the topic isn't. Tearlach 17:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Now rewritten as sensible stub - please reconsider votes Tearlach 18:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep now Carlossuarez46 19:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep rewrite. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, obviously. It is more commonly called mithridate. The Oxford English Dictionary even has an entry for this, although under the alternate spelling of mithridatium. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-01-25 23:52
• Comment: The content has been greatly expanded, and there are still thousands of other sources that could be used. People should really try doing some research around here before assuming they know everything worth knowing. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-01-26 00:06
• Strong keep due to rewrite. Andy Saunders 00:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Important to antiquitarians. --maru (talk) contribs 04:03, 26 January 2006 (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.