Template:Did you know nominations/Pyrithione
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Pyrithione
[edit]- ... that pyrithione is used to prepare medicated shampoos to treat dandruff and seborrhoeic dermatitis?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Allen Fox
- Comment: Reference that pyrithione is used to prepare zinc pyrithione: Example 16 in this patent or this much more recent patent where the pyrithione is produced and used in situ.
Reference that zinc pyrithione is used for medicated shampoos for dandruff and sebhorrhoeic dermatitis: This 2014 review says that "zinc pyrithione have been in use as photoprotecting, soothing agents or as active ingredient of antidandruff shampoos" (abstract) and "Zinc pyrithione 1% in a shampoo base is a proven treatment modality for seborrhoeic dermatitis and is an active ingredient, mostly in combination with ketoconazole, of several antidandruff shampoos available over the counter or on prescription" (Seborrhoeic Dermatitis section).
Created by EdChem (talk). Self-nominated at 04:15, 24 December 2016 (UTC).
Unfortunately, unless I'm missing something, this article was nominated 9 days after creation, i.e. 2 days too late. Everything else looks fine – article is long enough, well cited, neutral, no copyvio found; hook is cited and short enough; QPQ done. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Anypodetos: I started the article and expanded it to this stage the same day. It was at about 2000 characters, so was nominatable at that point. I further expanded it to 4856 characters the day I nominated it. You are correct this was on day 9; in the lead up to Christmas and with wiki-controversy on the Explore journal article, I got swamped. Under rule D9, the 7 day limit is applied strictly only when there is a large backlog, which there wasn't IMO as we were still running at one set per day, and an article "may still be approved if it were created or expanded after the oldest date listed in Template talk:Did you know#Older nominations." In light of the substantial work in this new article, presently over 5000 characters and 29 references, I ask that you exercise the discretion available to you under D9 to approve the nomination. Alternatively, a discussion could be held at WT:DYK to seek community consensus, if you would prefer to gather further input. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I wasn't aware of D9. If none of the DYK regulars objects, I'm happy to approve this article. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
