Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hinniegram


 * 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   delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 22:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hinniegram

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Ignoring the COI, the subject of the article has nowhere near the coverage required by WP:GNG Nuttah (talk) 22:41, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 22:56, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep There is a single Google Books hit, which may provide some extra sources. Outside that nothing. scope_creep (talk) 23:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * A book that Dr Jon Hinnie is credited with supplying material for. As I said there is nowhere near the coverage required by WP:GNG - mainly because there is zero independent coverage. Nuttah (talk) 07:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:04, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a mnemonic or teaching aid for interpreting blood gas results, but it does not appear to have entered the mainstream or to have spread beyond its namesake/originator. Furthermore, the article is written in WP:HOWTO style, and there would be little or nothing left of the article if the how-to information was removed. --MelanieN (talk) 17:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep or Merge The term is being used as witnessed by the book which cites it. Would it be better placed in an article on blood gas iterpretation ? Heidwork (talk) 11:01, 18 November 2010 (UTC) — Heidwork (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The book includes contributions by Dr Jon Hinnie, what is needed is evidence that this term is in common use from totally independent reliable sources. Nuttah (talk) 18:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The book was written by John Larkin who I assume is independent and reliable. John Larkin has written the section on The Hinniegram, not Dr Jon Hinnie. John Larkin has published at least one other book that I can find (Cynical Acumen). Both these publications were through a reputable/established publisher - namely radcliffe-oxford. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heidwork (talk • contribs) 09:10, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The book specifically credits Dr Jon Hinnie as contributing material, so no, it is not independent. The number of other books John Larkin has written, and who has published them, is irrelevant. The independent coverage must cover Hinniegram. Nuttah (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, or transwiki to Wikibooks. There is nothing encyclopedic to be said about this; this is material for a professional procedural manual.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:57, 27 November 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.