Template talk:Did you know/Pentoxyverine

Pentoxyverine

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as 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 Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle}

... that the cough suppressant medication pentoxyverine is used in experimental pharmacology as a sigma-1 receptor agonist?

Reviewed: Calcinus tubularis ([1])

5x expanded by Anypodetos (talk). Self nom at 15:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Length	Newness	Cited hook	Interest	Sources	Neutrality	Plagiarism/paraphrase
✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔	✔

Expansion is sufficient, hook looks ok to me, verified in source, didn't notice any plagiarism/paraphrasing issues. If anyone finds the hook too jargony, another route to go might be the fact that the drug suppresses the cough reflex in the central nervous system (I don't know if that's unusual or not; personally when I think "cough suppressant" I think stuff like throat lozenges, so this seemed interesting). rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The most commonly prescribed cough medicine (at least in Austria) contains dihydrocodeine, which also suppresses the cough reflex in the CNS (but at different receptors); and there are at least half a dozen other opioids used against cough; so that's not too exceptional. A possibility would be

ALT1: ... that the medication pentoxyverine suppresses the cough reflex in the central nervous system, although it is not an opioid?

because most other cough suppressants are opioids; but for that I need to find a ref saying it does not act at opioid receptors.

Nope. Also activates opioid kappa receptors, at least in vitro. [2]. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 06:03, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, if some of the expansion content was taken/translated from the German article, it would probably be good to indicate that on the talk page. The fact that this article was expanded using the German article (if that is indeed the case) is not a problem, though. rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I got the idea for expansion when I saw that dewiki had a longer article, but all I really copied from there is the fact that it's available as liquid and as suppositories, and Brown's paper about the sigma-1 receptor agonism. For everything else, I used a newer edition of the Austria-Codex than the one referenced in the German article, and Drugs.com, and the Arzneistoff-Profile ("Medication Profiles"). So I don't think it is necessary to include {{Translated page}}, but I have no problem if anyone thinks it should be there. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, yeah, I agree it's not necessary. (I don't know German so I couldn't tell whether or not the article was translated from there.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that the original and ALT1 are not at all hooky. Is this bit too controversial to make a hook out of? "Although X is commonly used to treat respiratory illnesses, no controlled clinical trials regarding the efficiency of pentoyxverine have been conducted." Tony (talk) 04:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we shouldn't use negative information for the hook? Anyway, while this is sourced, I wouldn't bet my head that there isn't an old (pre-internet) controlled trial hidden somewhere. Tweaked the wording. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with the original hook, since my suggestion and ALT1 aren't usable. As far as I'm concerned, everything is good to go on this one. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:06, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]