Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moynahan syndrome


 * 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 Noonan Syndrome with Multiple Lentigines. (non-admin closure) sst✈  07:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Moynahan syndrome

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completing nomination on behalf of an IP editor, whose rationale (below) is copied from the article talk page. I make no recommendation - but if the subject doesn't actually exist, then deletion may be warranted. Of course, if it does exist but is a different thing, then that's where we need to reference and copy edit and make the article accurate. A redirect may also be appropriate, if there is an article for whatever disease that is sometimes referred to by this title. So, now that I've muddied the waters enough - have at. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

"Moynahan Syndrome" is a misnomer. The "New Syndrome" as identified by the symptoms of patient "LW" described by Dr. EJ Moynahan FRCP (Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians) in Proc R Soc Med. 1962 November; 55(11): 959–960: Multiple Symmetrical Moles, with Psychic and Somatic Infantilism and Genital Hypoplasia: First Male Case of a New Syndrome, was never defined as "Moynahan Syndrome" nor was it ever referenced as such. Ref here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1896920/. References from whonamedit.com and Andrews' Diseases of the Skin: clinical Dermatology to this article, mimic the same symptoms identified by the Proc R Soc Med. 1962 November; 55(11): 959–960 journal publication but also inaccurately reflect this as "Moynahan Syndrome". 70.196.193.31 (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  14:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment / delete  There is stuff all over the WWW re this term, but what it all means will need someone with some basic medical knowledge to sort out. The stub does not meet basic wiki understandability guidelines. I have no idea what it means.  I got more off the WWW search I did.  So perhaps delete for now, not because of not notable but due to poor article? Aoziwe (talk) 13:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Do not delete for lack of understandability. The article is perfectly understandable, though the terms cutaneous condition and lentigines should be linked in order to explain them. Probably "congenital" should be linked to Congenital disorder as well. I know exactly what it means because I can read English and follow blue links that explain technical terms. The fact that an article could not be understood by a medically illiterate person who can't be bothered to follow blue links or use a dictionary does not mean that it is gibberish. No comment on whether the article should be moved or merged as a misnomer. James500 (talk) 13:47, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Understanding each term is fine. No problem there.  But what do they mean in combination as a 'characterised' syndrome?   I refer you to WP:Understandability.   WP:AGF  Cheers.   Aoziwe (talk) 11:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Prima facie, "characterised" is an ordinary English word (see eg Compact OED) that simply means, in this context, something to the effect that the combination of symptoms is the sign and mark by which the disease is recognised (and distinguished from other diseases). The word is used in many medical sources, but I am unable to find a medical definition after a brief search. Per WP:PRESERVE, MTAU has never been a grounds for page deletion, as such problems can always be fixed. That said, as "characterised" is an ordinary English word, I don't think that MTAU is engaged, though the wording might perhaps be made clearer. I never said that I doubted your good faith, and I don't. James500 (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry mate. I did feel you came on a bit strong with 'The fact that . . .'. My reference to 'but what it all means' was meaning that someone with medical knowledge will be needed to arbitrate between the nom's claim that the syndrome has never been formally described and characterised versus the article which by definition claims it has been.  Aoziwe (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect Already exists at Noonan Syndrome with Multiple Lentigines. Moynahan is just a different name for it, as already noted there. The two study sources also already exist there. It took 15 seconds to find this info from google... --Mr. Magoo (talk) 10:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * In addition I noticed this article linked there in the See Also. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 10:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect as above by Mr. Magoo. But also transclude basis of nom over to target's talk page. Aoziwe (talk) 11:55, 26 February 2016 (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.