This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention 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.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Futures studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Futures studies 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.Futures studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Futures studiesTemplate:WikiProject Futures studiesfutures studies articles
I've removed this for a rather complex reason. Any entry in this list must be a technology that doesn't already exist, and it must be backed-up by a Wikipedia article (i.e. blue-linked) or a source. In the case of Anticarcinogen there is a wikipedia article, but it lacks any source except a dictionary definition, so we're relying on the blue-link rather than any source being available. The problem with the Wikipedia page on anticarcinogens, and the source it uses (the dictionary definition) is that neither says that anticarcinogens don't yet exist, and are merely a hypothetical technology yet to be developed. In fact, the article says that health claims for anticarcinogens are regulated by the FDA etc., which implies that such claims are being made, and therefore that someone thinks they have developed an anticarcinogen. Therefore we can only have it in this list if someone can find a source that indicates that the FDA has currently refused all possible usages of the term on the grounds that no one has yet made an anticarcinogen. Is this the case? We can't say they're hypothetical simply because we don't believe the claims. Elemimele (talk) 16:58, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A follow-up; a Google search for anticarcinogen food supplements indicates that claims of the practical existence of anticarcinogens are certainly numerous! Elemimele (talk) 17:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should articles of the technologies that are red linked be made? Are there more sources besides the links next to them that can warrant article creations? FireInMe (talk) 01:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
