Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naftalan oil

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 keep. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Naftalan oil

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficient evidence that this fringe theory is a notable fringe theory. Guy Macon (talk) The sources listed at the end of the existing IRS Heritage citation may lead to something usable. 12:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there may be some fringe belief associated with the use of this oil, but there is nothing fringe about the article, which is about the oil itself, certainly a real substance, and certainly produced as mentioned, and used as mentioned. I don't speak Azerbaijani, but there seem to be many possible sources in that language. The assertion that there is not enough evidence is wrongly being applied to what is already in the article (which however is probably already enough to prove the topic is notable), when the question as always is, "is there evidence available in the world?"; the answer to that must be yes. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have citations for any of these sources? --Guy Macon (talk) 14:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I undeleted this once before, when it had been deleted because of an overload of junk, but underneath the junk is a real-world phenomenon, which may be purely psychological, but it still seems notable enough for an article as it does have a bit of a footprint. That's where any pseudo-scientific stuff can and should be explained, as there's a similar kind of a place with this thing in another country, and it makes more sense to consolidate any such explanation instead of having to have it duplicated. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:07, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Naftalan, Azerbaijan. That article is relatively short, and contains little information of Naftalan oil that is in this stub. It can be split back out if deemed necessary. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Definitely fringe nonsense. But notable fringe nonsense. Source examples include:

Composition and Properties of the Unique Oil from Azerbaijan’s Naftalan Oilfield - Russian Journal of General Chemistry
Naphthalan--a natural medicinal product - Acta Dermatovenerol Croatia
The blood rheological properties in children with neurodermatitis undergoing naphthalan therapy at Naftalan health resort - Vestnik Dermatologii i Venerologii
Oxidative-reductive metabolic indices in the blood in chronic rheumatoid polyarthritis under naftalan therapy - Voprosy Revmatizma
Naftalan: The Azerbaijan resort where guests bathe in crude oil - CNN
Naftalan - The Miracle Oil - Azerbaijan International
Naftalan, miracle oil that treats everything - AzerNews
Azerbaijan’s ‘petroleum spa’ offers treatment with crude oil baths - Daily Sabah
Feeling low on energy? Have a bath in a barrel of crude oil - The Independent
Crude oil baths a controversial ‘cure’ in Azerbaijan - South China Morning Post

There's quite a lot of discussion of the oil's usage over history and its claimed medical and scientific properties. Silver seren^C 19:44, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the above sources, I am now leaning strongly towards Keep. I am not going to withdraw the nomination, though. I plan on doing a lot of work on the article if it is kept and I want a solid keep decision instead of a withdraw. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BTW the full text of the journal article from Acta Dermatovenerologica Croatica can be found at https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=131453&lang=en --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:29, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep We have to make sure we are not promoting pseudoscience or bad science here. Since Naftalan is a medical-related issue, I feel the evidence is borderline. Cinadon36 14:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of the article on the topic as such shouldn't be promotion of whatever fringe beliefs are associated with it, as long as we make sure WP:UNDUE is observed. Do we have reason to believe that this is so unlikely to be even mentioned in any reliable sources that we would fail to properly cover opposing viewpoints to this purported medicinal use of crude oil? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is lack of reliable medical-related sources, how can we cover a medical related issue with decency? Cinadon36 08:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To reiterate what I just said - there's a lack of sources in the article, or ones that you can't find in general? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:40, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe to make this argument a bit more obvious - the special hospital at the Croatian site of this kind of oil has a website that directly promotes this thing in medical terms, e.g. https://naftalan.hr/prirodno-lijecenje/ljekoviti-naftalan or https://naftalan.hr/zdravlje/jedinstvenost-naftalana The hospital is not exactly a random private facility, it's part of the government health system, per e.g. https://zdravlje.gov.hr/arhiva-80/ministarstvo-zdravlja/zdravstvene-ustanove-u-republici-hrvatskoj/specijalne-bolnice/666 and it hires medical doctors and such. They don't appear to be listed as an institution at the Croatian scientific bibliography website https://www.bib.irb.hr/ (at least my searches can't find them), but a search of papers actually finds a few references to them, at e.g. https://hrcak.srce.hr/search/?show=results&stype=1&c%5B0%5D=article_search&lang=en&t%5B0%5D=naftalan or https://hrcak.srce.hr/search/?show=results&stype=1&c%5B0%5D=article_search&lang=en&t%5B0%5D=naphtalan So we should try to make a modicum of an effort to examine that, and whatever else is out there, and describe it in encyclopedic terms, rather than dismissing it out of hand. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, fringe? Yes. But notable fringe, with sources like CNN covering people taking a bath in this gunk. Odder than "medical springs" with water, anything medical here is wacko, but notable.--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 08:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep if the article can be rewritten to clearly show it's fringe nonsense, if not then Delete. - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 06:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I definitely have plans to rewrite the article with WP:MEDRS sources, once we have an official ruling that the AfD result was keep. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[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.