Talk:Aloracetam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Pharmacology (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Chemicals (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

WTH?[edit]

This article... makes no sense. I would agree with the bit that says this isn't a racetam. 98.222.52.242 (talk) 04:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Notability tag[edit]

Meodipt, are you able to help establish its notability? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 18:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Well there has been established consensus in the past that any drug which has got far enough through development to be assigned an INN name is notable simply on that basis. Certainly there are a lot of people who are interested in the racetam class of drugs and would want this page to remain so it could be compared with the others, and there are many drugs which have failed trials for one application only to be re-purposed at a later stage and used for something else. Alzheimer's is a particularly challenging condition to treat, so the fact this drug failed trials does not mean it is not useful entirely. However this is certainly a borderline case, and the "deletionist" faction on here has become more prominent in recent years, so it is hard to say if this page would survive a deletion nomination these days. I'm sure additional references could be found if you searched hard enough, but I doubt they would say much more than what is on here already, aside from perhaps how it is made, the underlying SAR behind its structure, and why it failed in clinical trials. Meodipt (talk) 21:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)