Talk:A-type proanthocyanidin

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

COI

I added a COI tag because I suspect the author of this page, Ahertzy (talk · contribs), may be Alex Herzlinger, co-counder of Youtea. Rees11 (talk) 13:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of YouTea anywhere in this article. Please search PubMed - at least 10 articles discuss A-Type Proanthocyanidins, their anti-adhesion activity, and link to UTI prevention. Even a Cochrane review has been conducted. The scientific evidence surrounding A-Type Proanthocyanidins is strong. Why does Wikipedia not have an article summarizing A Type Proanthocyanidins? And this article does address the shortcomings of those trials. —Preceding unsigned User:ahertzy comment added by Ahertzy (talk • contribs) 19:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you in the business of selling A Type Proanthocyanidin, or connected with a company that is? If so, you have a conflict of interest (COI). If not, sorry I misunderstood. Rees11 (talk) 21:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even a Cochrane review has been conducted.

See below: the Cochrane review makes no mention of A-Type Proanthocyanidins. And WP:MEDRS requires secondary sources, not editor-selected primary sources. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 02:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was do not merge into Proanthocyanidin. -- DarkCrow^Caw 18:14, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've proposed that this is merged into the Proanthocyanidin as it seems as though it would be better to include it there and because this page repeats some of what the main article says. (see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Youtea_and_related_articles for COI problems too). Smartse (talk) 17:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge – I'm not a professional chemist but these compounds seem closely related, and a merged article would not be overly long. Rees11 (talk) 22:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no merge - I expect both articles will grow. Their style/tone/level are different and a merge would create an unbalanced article, and a later split would be a pain. Rod57 (talk) 14:38, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

no merge - An article about a sub-category or sub-division should not be merged with an article about a broader category. For example Cedar should not be merged with Tree, city should not be merged with county, engine should not be merged with car, dog should not be merged with mammal, etc. A type proanthocyanidin should be mentioned in a short paragraph with a Main article link in the proanthocyanidin article. Greensburger (talk) 06:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

The Refs section needs some cleanup. Most of them are just urls pointing to abstracts. They should be replaced by the title, author, journal name, etc, with the url, preferably using the cite template. Rees11 (talk) 12:56, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further to that, as I've just said at WP:COIN, the whole article is unsatisfactory per Wikipedia:Reliable sources (medicine-related articles), which requires medical articles to be sourced from reliable secondary sources. Building articles from editor-selected primary papers is seriously open to cherry-picking and original synthesis.

An overall citation check is needed: tags added. I just removed this statement

A Type Proanthocyanidins found in cranberries and blueberries have been linked to the prevention of urinary tract infections. [1]

which is not verified by the citation. It refers to these berries and their juice, with no mention of A Type Proanthocyanidins. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not checked all the refs but the one I did check did not support the statement in the article (which I removed). Agreed they all need to be checked. I don't have the time or inclination. I almost think the whole article needs to be removed. Rees11 (talk) 22:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gordonofcartoon, I am completely baffled by your actions and comments. I made a strong effort to cite the only credible secondary source for cranberries, A Type PACs, and UTIs: Jepson RG, Mihaljevic L, Craig JC. Cranberries for treating urinary tract infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1998, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD001322. [1] But for some reason you deleted the citation and then state that my article is "sourced entirely from primary sources." Yes, it is sourced entirely from primary sources because you deleted my secondary source citation. That's like you kicking mud on my shoes and then complaining that my shoes are dirty. Really, this seems like a witch hunt. I did make a mistake in organizing my references. After the statement "A Type Proanthocyanidins found in cranberries and blueberries have been linked to the prevention of urinary tract infections"(deleted by Gordonofcartoon) I meant to insert this reference: (AB Howell, "Bioactive compounds in cranberries and their role in prevention of urinary tract infections." Mol Nutr Food Res. 2007 Jun;51(6):732-7. Rees11 and Gordoncartoon, I have made my best effort to accomodate your demands for citations and sources. I have cited 5 secondary sources and a host of primary sources. I hope this satisfies you. Ahertzy (talk · contribs)

Citations and sources are not some arbitrary whim of mine, they are Wikipedia policy. Thanks for fixing them. It would also help if you could provide a meaningful Edit summary (in the little text form below the edit window), especially since you seem to have a conflict of interest here. Rees11 (talk) 19:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A-type proanthocyanidin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707013029/http://www.imm.ac.cn/journal/ccl/1410/141015-1033-02-781-p4.pdf to http://www.imm.ac.cn/journal/ccl/1410/141015-1033-02-781-p4.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.. Removed. --Zefr (talk) 18:11, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]