Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticisms of medicine (2nd nomination)
Oh, what a mess. Yet, that's pretty much a textbook example of . Even if each separate axis of criticism was supported by rock-solid RS (which is not really the case at the moment but it is within the realm of possibilities), what would be needed is sources (e.g. sociology studies; emphasis on plural) lumping all those separate criticisms together. A quick GScholar search did not turn up anything remotely resembling that, though I will admit that's not my domain and I might have overlooked something obvious. Also, the first AfD's closure might have been invalid, but plainly on procedural/closure rationale grounds, and it certainly is no obstacle to quick renomination
— User:Tigraan, 11:41, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SYNTH (Wikipedia:No original research)