Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hypocalciuria


 * 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 (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Hypocalciuria

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

unsuitable for Wikipedia, perhaps move to wiktionary.  - Jameson L. Tai   talk ♦  contribs  01:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ' Keep But Expand . Delete' Trees Rock MyGoal 02:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't have the tone for wikipedia. Moving to the wiktionary? I'm not sure. -- Ryan Cross ( talk  ♠  Review ) 02:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and a WP:TROUT for nominating this page four minutes after it was created. This is clearly a genuine medical condition and I assume the creator is planning to expand it — even if not, someone at WP:MED is presumably in a position to expand this easily, given the number of major reliable sources even a 30-second Google-skim turns up. (In this instance I don't propose to expand it myself, as I don't have the specialist knowledge and I don't want to risk introducing errors into a medical article for obvious reasons.) —  iride  scent  02:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Iridescent. I would like to give this article a chance before deleting also.-- Ryan Cross ( talk  ♠  Review ) 03:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per iridescent. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 03:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this and cancer and heart failure. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 03:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per iridescent; give it a chance since it's so young. Trout to the nom for AfDing so soon; and a second trout to Trees Rock, for providing a !vote with no reasoning attached again. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - give it a chance to be developed. Many reliable sources out there to demonstrate notability. And yeah, per Brewcrewer. -- Beloved Freak  09:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - appears to be an encyclopedic concept with plenty of future potential for expansion. No reason to delete, it would be nice if the nominator had provided more of a rationale than "unsuitable". ~ mazca talk 12:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a stub for an encyclopedic topic.  It needs expansion, not deletion. Klausness (talk) 16:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Iridescent -XxKibaxX Talk 16:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. In contrast to hypercalciuria which is a very noteworthy topic this one is and will remain nothing more than a dicdef. Btw, current definition and references refer to hyper- not hypocalciuria. --Eleassar my talk 17:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note to closer - Do give undue weight in this instance to Eleassar who knows more about the topic than I (or I assume any of the others) do. —  iride  scent  17:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note to Iridescent - Is this sarcasm? If so, please refrain from arguments ad hominem. Otherwise, my apologies. --Eleassar my talk 17:36, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not at all - I'm assuming that, as the only !voter here who's actually a part of WP:MED, you're more likely to know if this is expandable. —  iride  scent  17:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The symptom is quite notable. I have rewritten the article to correctly report its meaning and significance. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this had a link to it that was dead, ALSO there was no page discribing Hypocalciuria. This is a notable/signficant medical condition and needs a wiki page!  Please forgive me as Im a newbie when it comes to makeing wiki pages as this was my 1st one. What can I do to improve it?? (I was very suprised that it was nomiated like the minute I wrote it.....lol) Medicellis (talk) 01:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:08, 22 May 2008 (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.