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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.
I am inclined towards failing the article at this time due to a lack of thoroughness, dense prose that is not clear to a lay audience, and more importantly, a lack of compliance with WP:MEDRS.
The sections on recreational abuse are sourced almost entirely to decades-old primary reports instead of newer literature review such as 1 and 2 (same authors for both papers, and more or less the same content). Additionally, there are a number of questionable sources such as cornucopeia.cn, misrepresented sources such as a Merriam-Webster definition for alkylamine citing propylhexedrine being a alkylamine, and the overall issue of the median age of sources appearing to be sometime around the 1980's.
The prose is also dense and incomprehensible to a lay audience: I don't think the article should require anything beyond a perhaps advanced high school level of chemistry and biology to understand. The Interactions, Mechanism of action, Synthesis, and Detection in bodily fluids are very heavy in advanced terms with almost no effort to explain what, for example, a sympathomimetic is.
You are free to nominate the article again after addressing the issues raised above or if you disagree with my review. AryKun (talk) 14:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion 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.
Hello, I'm going to be reviewing this article. There have been major improvements to the text since the last GA nomination, but not everything has been addressed; hopefully that can be taken care of through the course of this review. I'm still working on reviewing sources and getting a full grasp on the prose corrections needed. Reconrabbit17:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The meaning of the word is understood. It's just an unusual construction to see in the encyclopedia style. Thank you for addressing the points noted here. Reconrabbit16:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With respect to source [30], that is racemic. Generally, a drug product in the U.S. is assumed racemic or such unless otherwise indicated. See cetirizine (Zyretc) and levcetirizine (Xyzal). One is indicated simply as cetirizine, while the other is specifically indicated as levcetirizine. Irruptive Creditor (talk) 20:41, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In regard to the matter of contraindications, I would say that the statement "Talk with the doctor before you give this drug to a child younger than 6 years old" is a contraindication. Generally, the entire point of an OTC drug is that it doesn't need physician supervision to administer. Perhaps, it could be reworded as "Propylhexedrine is not recommended in individuals younger than six years of age." Irruptive Creditor (talk) 02:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The oral tablet preparation is Obesin, an image thereof is shown in the Brand Names subheader. There it states the dose is 25mg. Since I cannot find much more about Obesin, I have corrected it. Irruptive Creditor (talk) 02:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All items that are of concern to this review have been addressed. Thank you for your work (and your patience, sorry about the delay!) Reconrabbit19:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
"Summarily" and the surrounding information summarizing the quotations above it isn't necessary. The main use of the phrase summarily on Wikipedia is in reference to summary execution, something I found trying to find other uses. Otherwise, understandable prose with the text only becoming technical when necessary.
The lead section is extremely short and does not incorporate most of the relevant information from the article. Some things to include would be the history of the drug, possibly some preparation methods and society and culture information. Pseudoephedrine is a decent model of a similar decongestant with a better lead.
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): {{GAList/check|?}
Some quotes are a little long, but the FDA and IHA have no copyright on their work, which makes it less of a concern. I don't know what the status of the Army website is.
The photo of propylhexedrine HCl is of very low quality and also causes a WP:SANDWICH issue with the structure image on the other side of the page (though this isn't a huge issue). The same problem appears with Glenn E. Ullyot and the inhaler image and the photos of containers at the Brand Names header. It may be for the best if all of the product images are moved to the left and a {{Clear}} template is added at the end of "Eventin".
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
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.