Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sobrietol
I was asked to re-examine this article after its rewriting, and I believe that the guidelines of  are the most appropriate ones to apply.  I quote: "Coverage on Wikipedia should not make a fringe theory appear more notable than it actually is.1 Since Wikipedia describes significant opinions in its articles, with representation in proportion to their prominence,2 it is important that Wikipedia itself does not become the validating source for non-significant subjects. Other well-known, reliable, and verifiable sources that discuss an idea are required so that Wikipedia does not become the primary source for fringe theories. Furthermore, one may not be able to write about a fringe theory in a neutral manner if there are no independent secondary sources of reasonable reliability and quality about it.".  I looked at all the sources so thoughtfully and thoroughly provided -- I can't quarrel with the amount of work that's gone into this, which is impressive, I merely disagree with the conclusion.  I don't see "other well-known, '''reliable''' (emphasis mine) and verifiable sources", I definitely don't see any peer-reviewed science, and I don't wish "Wikipedia to become the primary source for fringe theories".  I cheerfully admit that I have a bias against furthering the commercial applications of what I see as junk science, and I feel there is the strong possibility that Wikipedia is being used here to promote a commmercial product that is possibly not only useless but actually dangerous
— User:Accounting4Taste, 17:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:FRINGE (Wikipedia:Fringe theories)