Talk:Seizure (disambiguation)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 11:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Seizure (disambiguation) →
 * There are two distinct categories of seizures in medicine: epileptic and non-epileptic. Currently, "seizure" redirects to Epileptic seizure. Different books and other sources I have read on the topic state contradictory information on which type is more common, but I do believe that a reader searching for information on seizures may be about equally likely to read about either one, or possibly both. Given this, I believe that the best option is to have "Seizure" be the disambiguation page. Tatterfly (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This has recently been discussed at WP:MED. Nearly all the links to "seizure" refer to the epileptic kind, which should give you some idea that nearly every reader looking up "seizure" will want to read about epileptic seizures. As someone once said, there are two kinds of seizures: epileptic seizures and misdiagnoses. The non-epileptic seizures are misdiagnoses and are not actually seizures. Colin°Talk 15:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And seizure of goods by court order. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose as Seizure is properly disambig. Karry145 (talk) 15:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: 1.) This may have been discussed before. But no discussion ever means anything is permanent (see WP:STONE). 2.) It is true to so many articles that link to seizure refer to epileptic seizures. But incoming links can always be changed. It would take some effort, but all that has to be done is to change seizure to epileptic seizure when need be. 3.) "As someone once said, there are two kinds of seizures: epileptic seizures and misdiagnoses. The non-epileptic seizures are misdiagnoses and are not actually seizures." Now who is that someone? 4.) Where is the proof that nearly every reader looking up "seizure" will want to read about epileptic seizures? There is actually no way to know this. Tatterfly (talk) 03:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Support "seizure" should be a dab page. As with the number of crime dramas on TV, and bankruptcies in real life, I should think that seizure by the courts is a very common meaning. 70.29.212.131 (talk) 03:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * We have no article on "seizure by the courts", which indicates it isn't an encyclopaedic topic. Colin°Talk 14:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose. As of April, when Epileptic seizure was at Seizure, the article had >83,000 pageviews, with no more than 6% clicking on the hatnote for something else. That compares to 12,000 for Search and seizure, 4,000 for Non-epileptic seizure and <2,000 for the film and novel. Epileptic seizure is the primary usage of Seizure and should be moved back to that title. Station1 (talk) 07:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Pageviews does not necessarily mean the most common usage. It is possible that many people entered "seizure" just to find out how to navigate to some other meaning. Especially those who read only and do not edit, they may not be familiar with disambiguations, etc. Tatterfly (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This request is a non-starter. It completely breaks our naming rules which specify that editors using the wikilink name that comes naturally should hit the obvious article. You are proposing that every seizure link goes to a DAB page. Not only would that involve editing a large number of articles, but it would also create an ongoing problem of new material linking to the DAB page. But the biggest problem is that although the word "seizure" has other meanings in the dictionary, nobody has written an encyclopaedia article about them. Colin°Talk 14:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Besides all the medical uses being named here, legal seizure (by whatever title) is a very common usage that appears in the news all the time and is a basic term in our vocabulary. I'm sure plenty of people wish to read about that. Hellno2 (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Although consensus does change, this move was discussed twice, most recently at length and less than 2 months ago (by some of us here) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Archive 18.  I don't think we need to repeat the entire discussion.  Additionally, this was discussed originally at User talk:Colin/Archive 4 when Tatterfly first tried to turn "Seizure" into a disambiguation page.  To summarize the discussions, originally, the article about epileptic seizures was located at "Seizure".  In June 2008, Tatterfly was bold, moved "Seizure" to "Epileptic Seizure", and made "Seizure" a disambiguation page.  A discussion followed and consensus was that the primary use of seizures was epileptic seizures, so "Epileptic Seizure" was moved back to "Seizure".  In April of this year, another discussion was started about seizure and convulsion articles.  The issue of primary topic of seizure came up again.  Consensus was that "epileptic seizure" was still the primary use of "seizure"; however, it was decided that "epileptic seizure" was a more precise, and thus better title for the article (similar to Heart attack vs. Myocardial infarction).  The article was then moved to "Epileptic seizure" and "Seizure" became a redirect to it.  There is no need for a disambiguation page at "Seizure" when there is a primary topic.  For those who claim the legal term "seizure" is the primary use of the word, I ask to see an article for this usage.  There is an article called Search and seizure, but nothing called "Legal seizure" or "Seizure by the courts", as mentioned above.  Until a legal article exists that could potentially serve by the name "seizure", there is no reason to continue the discussion that it may be a primary use.  The fact that this article does not exist - even after first having this discussion 2 years ago - should indicate that it is not the primary usage.  Additionally, WP:Law was notified about the "seizure" discussion in April at WP:MED (at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law/Archive 10), so an argument that only WP:MED influenced the recent consensus is moot.  Then, there are those who say "non-epileptic seizures" are just as likely to be a primary use as "epileptic seizures".  I, too, have heard "there are two kinds of seizures: epileptic seizures and misdiagnoses. The non-epileptic seizures are misdiagnoses and are not actually seizures", but I do not have a source (nor will I spend time looking for one).  In the context of medicine, when someone says "seizure", they are referring to "convulsions".  Any other context of seizure is always qualified, usually as a pseudoseizure.  But my experience with the term doesn't matter.  What does matter is that consensus at WP:MED is that "epileptic seizure" is the primary use of "seizure".  --Scott Alter (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Scott Alter. I'm one of those who saw the notification at WP:LAW, and as I said at that point, anecdotally, even though I deal with law as my day job, I feel strongly that the primary usage of seizure is epileptic seizure and not the legal or other usages. VernoWhitney (talk) 22:53, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.