Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis


 * 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. Delete: not a happening term. Three deletes and no arguments for keeping: I see no reason to relist. Drmies (talk) 02:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Cannot find a human reference for this term on pubmed, though the reference to diabetes and the incoming links are clearly suggestive of a human phenomenon. additionally, one of the few links i could find for this phenomenon (itself not WP:MEDRS), this article, does not suggest that it has anything to do with accumulation of sorbitol. [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ] # _  02:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: The term "Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis" is composed of hyper (excess)+ phaco (eye lens)+ sorbito (a sugar)+ myopic (nearsightedness)+ osis (disease) and supposed to mean nearsightedness due to increased blood sugar (sorbitol). Abnormal lens changes (including nearsightedness) are well-known in diabetes but they don’t have such a name and I have never heard such a strange term. I looked through Yanoff's ophthalmology textbook (ISBN:9780323043328) and Lens&Cataract AAO (ISBN:9781615251186) and couldn't find Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis in their index, neither in pubmed . The wiki page cites an article as reference but the article has not mentioned Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis. Unfortunately, google search results are not reliable because almost all of them cite wikipedia as their source.Kiatdd (talk) 05:38, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: This article is either a good faith original research effort on the part of a new editor or a well-conceived hoax. The editor has only made 5 edits[] all related to or insertion of wikilinks to Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis .Wlmg (talk) 14:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I found a source that is not a Wikipedia mirror it's on page 6 of this pdf --Wlmg (talk) 23:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This is related to ophthalmology. Unfortunately, optometrist websites like the one you mentioned (nova scotia association of optometrists) and like this one are not reliable. We have comprehensive textbooks of ophthalmology (AAO is actually 14 volumes), pubmed (over 20 million articles), and medical dictionaries (such as Dorlands, check the result . There is no mention of 'Hyperphacosorbitomyopicosis' in ophthalmology literature. Kiatdd (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:02, 15 April 2013 (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.