Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filicollosis


 * 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 redirect to Filicollis anatis.  So Why  07:23, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Filicollosis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page has been unreferenced (and orphaned) since it was created in 2006, since when the only changes have been to cleanup tags, categories and wikilinks. I could find only a single reference to this term in the scientific literature: which is a translation of a German-language article. The only books on Google Books which use this term are copied from this Wikipedia page. If a disease caused by Filicollis species had a name, it could well be called filicollosis, but this term is not used by anyone in the English language for writing about the disease. I request that this page be deleted per these criteria: WP:DEL6 (neologism), WP:DEL7 (no reliable source), WP:DEL8 (not notable, no significant coverage). DferDaisy (talk) 03:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Maybe it's best to simply create a stub article about the species and redirect it there? Ausir (talk) 03:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree, and to this end have just created a stub for Filicollis anatis. See what you think. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:13, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'll add a note on the Organisms sorting page, too. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Filicollis anatis; nom is correct that "filicollosis" is almost never mentioned in scientific literature, but there's plenty of research on F. anatis—I just found and added highlights from two papers, and the second indicates how detailed the scholarship on this parasite is. Nonetheless, I can't find enough about the pathophysiology of infection in the final host (waterbirds) for an article on Filicollis infection as a disease (from the host's "perspective"); in the literature, that seems to be mostly discussed in the generality of Helminthiasis. FourViolas (talk) 02:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist 1 1 1 17:11, 2 August 2017 (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.