Talk:Candocuronium iodide

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Candocuronium iodide.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Article being tagged for clear deficiencies

This article bears 17 of 18 inline citations from primary sources, and so only one secondary source to support the primacy its content and neutrality of its statements. Moreover, 14 of the 17 primary citations are to the work of the same pair of collaborators (IG Marshall and H Singh). These, with particular word choices suggest a scientific POV issue that needs to be addressed. Note, I am not questioning that this pharmacologically active substance is notable; I am simply stating that this cannot be seen as a neutral, encyclopedic article as it presently stands. Tags are therefore added. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 04:19, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am now questioning notability

Absence of secondary sources, lack of solid, broadly interesting medicinal chemistry content (no descriptions of changes to improve agent properties, only in-house numbers and no structures of series members, etc.), and broadly self-promotional tone make this a candidate for redaction (to remove uninformative and self-promotional language), and then merger if no substantial secondary sources and other improvements appear within 3 mos. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]