Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astasia abasia


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was keep. Ifnord 19:15, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Astasia abasia
Source is bogus. Most likely a work of fiction. Bobby1011 04:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. Fiction it is certainly not; it's an archaic neurologic term (but then again, most neurologic terms are sort of obscure.)  Astasia refers to the inability to maintain station (stand upright) unassisted; abasia means that the base of gait (the lateral distance between the two feet) is inconstant or unmeasurable.  It's not always caused by conversion disorder; there are organic syndromes, such as those which destroy or inactivate the cerebellum, which cause it too.  Don't have a ref to hand at the moment.   ikkyu2  ( talk ) 04:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I've attempted to clean up the article a bit. ikkyu2  ( talk ) 04:44, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's real, as a quick google search will verify.   dbtfz talk 04:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ikkyu2 Ruby 04:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above 3 keeps. Mike (T C) [[Image:Star_of_life2.svg|20px]] 05:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and well done Ikkyu2 for the cleanup. Capitalistroadster 05:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to be a legitimate medical term.  (aeropagitica)   07:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obscure, which is why it should stay!--PaulWicks 09:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep and thanks to ikkyu2. --Lockley 13:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ikkyu2. Bobby, why did you think the "source" was "bogus", to the point of not checking it yourself as Dbtfz did? -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Real Avi 20:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, many thanks to ikkyu2. Chris Chan.talk.contribs 23:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Legit.  Samir   धर्म 23:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Perhaps speedy. Not a bad faith nom, but a mistaken one... that said, I assumed fake as well. Thanks ikkyu2. -AKMask 00:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep --Haham hanuka 17:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.