Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joint fasciitis


 * 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. Core desat 04:19, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Joint fasciitis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced article, no references available via google, possible hoax. Prod was contested by a third party. Shunpiker (talk) 16:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with nom, unsourced WP:OR. Cirt (talk) 16:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete or redirect. I'm not 100% convinced it's a hoax. The lack of ghits caused me to place the original prod, but after some research, I think it's equally likely that the author was refering to Necrotizing fasciitis -- a redirect to that article might be in order.--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I removed the prod and that's what I thought, too. It's either a) a hoax or b) the article simply isn't triggering Ghits because the name's not quite right. I tagged it for Wikiproject Medicine in the hopes that someone there might shed some light. I'll replace the hoax tag with an expert needed tag in the meantime. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I would support a redirect to Necrotizing fasciitis if there is a reference to support that "Joint faciitis" is a synonym in use for that condition. But the image that was initially provided for this article along with the unsourced statistics incline me to suspect a hoax. -- Shunpiker (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't think to check that. I see the image has now been deleted but its file name does not fill me with confidence. Perhaps after the big storm here on the east coast (of North America) someone with a medical background will weight in and answer whether this is valid as a redirect or not. It's becoming clearer to me that you were right all along about this one. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Real. Disgusting.  Redirect to Necrotizing fasciitis per Fabrictramp. Bearian (talk) 23:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Question: Is there any evidence to confirm that this is an accepted alias for necrotizing fasciitis? There's no question that necrotizing fasciitis is real, but at this point any connection between "joint fasciitis" and necrotizing fasciitis is speculative. If "joint fasciitis" is an original name for a real condition, it seems to me that the correct action would be to delete. Otherwise we set a precedent for the proliferation of imaginative names for diseases. -- Shunpiker (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've left a request for help over at WikiProject Medicine.--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If anyone with expert knowledge joins in with a countering view, I'll consider changing my mind, but my vote is now delete. I think this has gone on long enough. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * PubMed gives no hits for "Joint fasciitis", suggesting that it's not a specific condition of fasciitis worth giving separate attention. The fascia does include joint capsules and such, but the article's description is unsourced and sounds similar to necrotizing fasciitis. I'd suggest deleting it, but a redirect to necrotizing fasciitis or just fasciitis would be okay. &mdash; Scientizzle 17:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is a neologism. From the present text of the page the author must be referring to septic arthritis. There is no fascia in joints, so it is impossible to get fasciitis in joints. JFW | T@lk  21:03, 18 December 2007 (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.