Template:Did you know nominations/Preoperative care


 * 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: rejected by Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

The week is over and nothing has been done to give the nomination an interesting hook. Absent any hook, closing the nomination as unsuccessful.

Preoperative care

 * ... that preoperative care for minor heart surgery does not usually include cardiac imaging?
 * ALT1: ... that people who have minor heart surgery usually do not have cardiac imaging during preoperative care?
 * Reviewed: Krishnalal Shridharani
 * Comment: I work for a health organization and made this article in the course of my job duties described at WP:Choosing Wisely. It is my opinion that this article and hook are presenting noncontroversial health information of general interest.

Created/expanded by Bluerasberry (talk). Self nominated at 16:51, 3 September 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Length, history and reference verified. Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg I've re-opened this and puled it from the queue. What the article says is "Cardiac imaging and cardiac stress tests are usually unnecessary for people who do not have a serious heart condition and who are having surgery unrelated to the heart (my emphasis), not that cardiac imaging is unnecessary for minor heart surgery. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  15:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks like the hook has been corrected to reflect the source better. Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, no! I made a mistake, and I see why it was missed in the first check, no fault of . is right! Here is a new version:
 * ALT2: ... that cardiac imaging during preoperative care is usually not useful for patients having minor surgeries unrelated to the heart?
 * ALT3: ... that people who have surgery unrelated to the heart typically do not need cardiac imaging in their preoperative care?
 * It would have been embarrassing to have let that mistake through. Thanks for catching it.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  17:29, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't see how this is even remotely interesting. You may as well say "... that people who have brain surgery don't need their ankles x-rayed during preoperative care?" 97198 (talk) 05:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, you understand the situation, because that is what is happening. I added content to the article which suggests as much, but the sources do not say this outright and instead just say that the procedure is "overused". What is certain is that doctors, seemingly for no reason in published sources, are stating completely obvious things like "Do not do this procedure for no reason". There is data which says that the procedure is done for no reason, and statements by experts saying do not do the procedure for no reason, but the interesting fact that you want - "Doctors do things for no reason, therefore they should quit" is not published outright because the problem is too troublesome to admit in that way. The best I can do is close to what you say, "people who have brain surgery don't need their ankles x-rayed", because that is what reliable sources report. It is only interesting in the sense that experts say it this way.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  13:20, 11 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Bluerasberry, one of the requirements for DYK is that the hook should should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and interesting to a broad audience. As 97198 points out, neither ALT2 nor ALT3 are remotely interesting. Your task, if you wish this nomination to succeed, is to come up with an interesting hook from your article. I think you need to try basing the hook on something other than cardiac imaging. Sometimes articles don't have anything that can be made into an interesting hook, which means they don't qualify to be run at DYK. (Sometimes they slip through anyway, but they shouldn't.) I've sometimes not nominated articles because there weren't any facts that lent themselves to a sufficiently interesting hook. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Acknowledged, you are totally correct and my mind was in space. I knew all of this but somehow forgot everything. By the end of the week I will either propose a new hook or otherwise just leave this nomination. Thanks for your attention and for perceiving the nature of my oversight.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  21:54, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg The week is over and nothing has been done to give the nomination an interesting hook. Absent any hook, closing the nomination as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)