Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Binocular Dysphoria


 * 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 was Keep. Any merging or renaming discussion can take place on the article's talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 09:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Binocular Dysphoria

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Subject may not be valid, no real content, discussion in article space, only reference is a abc.net.au blog akaDruid (talk) 14:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, looks like it was probably created as part of a discussion on Reddit akaDruid (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: I don't see anything mentioning binocular dysphoria after a quick search so I don't think it's real. Even if there is, this article is beyond repair. Ratattuta (talk) 14:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep: Repair and perhaps rename article. Not sure why the user who did the "quick search" above "[didn't] see anything". Binocular dysphoria is mentioned by name in Heads-up Intraoperative Endoscopic Imaging: A Prospective Evaluation of Techniques and Limitations (Congress of Neurological Surgeons), and in Competing opposing stimulus simulator sickness reduction technique (US Patent 5829446 and European Patent EP0847027).  A key problem here is although numerous researchers have commented upon the phenomenon, there is no agreed-upon term that they all use.  Therefore a search looking strictly for the words "binocular dysphoria" will not turn up all references.  Unfortunately there is no single set of words that will turn up all references.  A complete search will extend to things like "dissociation of accommodation and convergence" and "binocular stress" in published research dealing with virtual reality and simulator technology.  A key paper here is "Binocular vision in a virtual world: visual deficits following the wearing of a head-mounted display" by Mon-Williams, Wann, and Rushton.  Summary: Binocular dysphoria is a real phenomenon that has been well documented.  A simple google search will not turn up all references due to inconsistent nomenclature between researchers. (And I type all this despite knowing I'll probably be ignored as a new user). - Throco (talk) 15:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: User left this comment on the page, and this comment was moved to the talk page: NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 17:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: until researchers can agree on the name of this phenomenon at least. It's too early to get its own article, but could find its place until then as a note in 3-D film or something. --bd_ (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - the sources establish that it meets notability standards as either a medical (cognitive / perceptual / psychological) brain phenomenon, and/or a theory about the same. The Pesce article on the subject is a reliable source, as an expert-written blog.  Mark Pesce is an authority on virtual reality and early 3D CG, although it is clear from the tone of the article that this is emerging science barely at the hypothesis stage, and not universally known or accepted.  As such, the article might best be recast and perhaps renamed so that it is about the theory, not about the phenomenon, which may or may not be a distinct medical condition.  It's not a good merge candidate because it is not specific to a single device, medium, product, etc.  If true it would apply to film, TV, VR headsets, 3D books, holograms, stereoscopes, etc.  The only viable merge I can see would be with an article about similar vision perception conditions.  If you trick out your eyes in any way, like looking at things upside down, they have trouble returning to normal.  I'll go out hunting for some sources.  - Wikidemon (talk) 17:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added a few more sources. So far they all stand for the proposition that Pesce is advancing this theory.  However, a piece by Pesce on the subject appears in a 1994 Wired Magazine article, which makes it a reliable source.  Pesce claims the existence of various studies on the subject so we just need to find those studies.  It seems likely that we'll have some more mainstream coverage on this over time.  - Wikidemon (talk) 18:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge: into Mark Pesce based on recent edits. akaDruid (talk) 12:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That is not an unreasonable outcome, as he seems to be the only person advancing this notion. Still, it would be interesting to suss out the studies he claims.  If those studies are real then it might be a wider issue than that.  Thanks for a sensible proposal.  - Wikidemon (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A minor correction; Pesce is not the only person "advancing this notion". The phenomenon is widely mentioned in VR resource.  Pesce is one of the few referring the the phenomenon by the name "Binocular Dysphoria", but even that phrase has cited usage other then by him.  I don't think merging into his article makes any sense. That is a biography of a single iving person, this is about an actual phenomenon observed by multiple researchers. - Throco (talk) 04:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say, based on the current references, there is not enough verifiable content to justify an article. All we can say from the current references is that one person is advancing this theory.  This can best be covered in the article about that person, until such time as we have suitable sources to write an article about the subject.  Throco, if you can source suitable references (perhaps by identifying, with references, the different terms which are equivalent) then I can't see any reason why an article couldn't be written.  But at present, there is nothing in the content to justify an article, and the Mark Pesce article is the best place for it. akaDruid (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep or rename/expand I note one article citing the phrase as if it has industry currency. It makes no sense to merge a (possibly quite significant) scientific topic into a bio. The article could be renamed to "Health effects of virtual reality" and expanded to include other health issues. -- Radagast3 (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2010 (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.