Talk:Tomato fever

Same as HFMD
This is the same as Hand Foot and Mouth Disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand,_foot,_and_mouth_disease — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.164.4 (talk) 16:10, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

yes. Hand Foot mouth disease is What people commonly calling tomato fever. The physician has confirmed the disease name --Cangaran (talk) 11:16, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Merger proposal
This page should be merged with hand foot mouth disease 111.92.77.216 (talk) 08:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to HFMD. Please see WP:NOTADVICE; we don't give medical advice, and certainly not when we don't have a single WP:MEDRS-compliant source. I've trimmed the text to the bare minimum to comply. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  11:45, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Against. We cannot merge it unless an until it is determined that tomato flu/fever has the same causative agent as hand foot mouth disease unless there is some other overriding reason to do the merge (and, at present, there is not). Jaredroach (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect. The (scant) literature seems to be saying that's what this is. so we should too. And this article#s sourcing is terrible. Alexbrn (talk) 05:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Adding to that article's interesting point about new vs. endemic, Wikipedia has had an article since June 2017, so not new at all in relation to the COVID fear that is fueling the reports. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  10:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste WP:COPYVIO
Most of the article was cut-and-paste plagiarism, so I've reduced it to nothing more than a definition, considering also that there are no WP:MEDRS-compliant sources. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:09, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://zeenews.india.com/india/tomato-fever-or-hfmd-virus-in-kerala-know-causes-and-symptoms-of-head-foot-and-mouth-disease-2463642.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:19, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:2022 India tomato fever outbreak
This draft has more information than this article, so can it stand on it's own? PopularGames (talk) 19:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it should it has more information than it's main article. This article is copyright claim and your article is not. I'm moving your draft now. And your draft will become an redirect. 2601:CB:2:2DD0:1091:6E69:F013:DCE6 (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2022 (UTC)


 * That draft has possibilities, is an improvement, but still needs considerable cleanup to comply with Wikipedia policy and guideline. I suggest that IP2601 hold off until it is cleaned up to a better state of compliance; I can work on it in a few hours. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  20:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you, and thanks for moving my article. This article is copy right claimed the article I made is more relliable. PopularGames (talk) 20:06, 21 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Lovely, now we have not one but two non-compliant articles in mainspace. Nice mess. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  20:08, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the move. We don't solve a problem here by creating the same problem in two articles.  If cleaned up to better comply with MEDRS, that content could go here, from where a merge to HFMD could be better discussed. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  20:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The revdels have been completed, and I will next look at correcting that draft and moving the content to here. PLEASE use some patience; this is a highly viewed website, and we have a responsibility to get it right on medical content, which we were not exercising in the previous versions of this article, nor are we (yet) in the draft improvement.  Give me an hour. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  20:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Done; this version does not overrely on the laypress and sources that don't meet WP:RS even for non-medical content (like The Economic Times) much less medical content (WP:MEDRS), does not cotain copyvio, does not give medical advice, and does not extend beyond what is known from high-quality sources. Please be responsible here about what is known from high-quality sources; Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTADVICE. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  21:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Infobox
Since we don't even know what the thing is yet, or where this content will end up, I oppose adding an infobox. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  21:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits (28 August)
might you add this article to your watchlist vis-a-vis whether some sort of protection might become needed if trends continue? See We have an undefined condition for which there are no WP:MEDRS sources, highly dubious laysources (because of the typical quality of Indian sources) and yet we can't merge the article elsewhere, since we don't really even know what the thing is. So for now, I've reduced it to the bare minimum, using only the Lancet article, and with very brief reliance on laysources only to indicate that there is an outbreak, and that some people call it a flu. We can't responsibly say anything more than this, without better sources. We don't have MEDRS sources yet to merge the content to HFMD, and yet good faith but new editors keep expanding the content (which may just end up at HFMD) based on dubious sources (see here and  here and quite a few more back in history, obscured to me due to copyvio revdel). (On my way to add welcome messages.) Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:39, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * WT:MED discussion
 * These sources may be reliable. They might support a merger. Jaredroach (talk) 21:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)


 * The first is a letter to the editor (fairly useless), while the second appears to only summarize the Lancet report. and I are already at merge and redirect, while you  were against.  Are you changing your declaration at ?  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  22:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't see the hurry. We should wait until we get reliable sources. You understand what is a reliable source better than I. Have you actually read the Tang article? I have (it has no paywall). I would not at this point describe that article as "fairly useless". Jaredroach (talk) 01:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I mean useless in terms of MEDRS because it is a letter to the editor; we can't use it to source anything really. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  01:38, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If we read that article, we should conclude that a merger is justified. However, if we are forbidden to consider that article, then we should conclude that a merger is not justified. Jaredroach (talk) 17:41, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think a good case can be made here for WP:IAR wrt WP:MEDRS; it doesn't look like the merge would be irresponsible, and it would provide more useful info to readers. Maybe we can get more feedback at WT:MED. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  17:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to see this merged.
 * AFAICT there aren't any MEDRS-ideal sources at all. We therefore need to do the best we can with the sources that exist.  These sources are pretty much in agreement that this is likely to be HFMD.  I suggest merging it as a new ==Section== after Hand, foot, and mouth disease, and wording it as "there's this thing, and it's suspected that it's HFMD". WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * as your is the only outstanding semi-objection, I will implement WAID's suggestion, unless you are opposed. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:30, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I have created the section at HFMD; I have not yet redirected here to there, but did add an anchor for a potential redirect. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:51, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am OK with that plan. We can use existing references, and when they are finally mentioned in a review article, we can replace the existing references, with a reference to the review article. Jaredroach (talk) 05:10, 6 September 2022 (UTC)