Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muscle memory (definition)


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 04:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Muscle memory (definition)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is not an appropriate encyclopedia article. It provides a very brief, unreferenced, overview of two closely related topics that use the term "muscle memory". Our policies and guidelines make clear that we have one article per topic. Powers T 12:25, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete&mdash;Unclear why we need a separate article to define a topic that is already covered in greater detail on Muscle memory.&mdash;RJH (talk) 19:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete content fork which is unnecessary. PlusPlusDave (talk) 23:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I do not see the need for this definition article when Muscle memory adequately defines the term. Mabiller (talk) 05:07, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Query: What do you guys think about Muscle memory (strength training)? Powers T 15:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It could be considered for a merge with Muscle memory, or be adapted as a main article for that section.&mdash;RJH (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The parts of section Muscle memory dealing with strength training seem out of place, as they describe intramuscular (local) phenomena dealing with muscular strength efficiency, instead of changes thought to take place in the brain dealing with skills. The heading of this section was changed recently (after this AfD was opened), adding emphasis to the strength aspect. --Lambiam 12:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This page appears to be a highly-nonstandard attempt at creating a disambiguation page for distinguishing between the more common popular meaning of the term "muscle memory" and the somewhat idiosyncratic and neologistic one of "muscle memory (strength training)" (of which I'm not convinced it is notable), created by the same user as the article under discussion. If the latter article is to be kept, a hatnote at Muscle memory should suffice. --Lambiam 12:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge I work in the muscle memory field, and I think a clearification is necessary. It is NOT correct as in the current entry Muscle memory that muscle memory is simply the non-technical term for procedural memory, see e.g. the Staron et al. reference, se also arguments from User:ArphaxadHunter in a dirscussion comment to Muscle memory from 2008 where he exactly imply muscle plasticity. Or do a websearch where you will see how the term muscle memory is used rather frequently (more frequently?) for strenght training related observations, for which there is an explanation not related to motor learning as referenced here, if you are not convinced, read the papers! It is not idiosyncratic nor neologistic. The definition article is referenced to some of the best peer reviewed journals, and to two non overlapping research groups (ref 2 and 3). A text similar to the one some of you want to delete have to be included somewhere simply to make it correct. If the changes are done as I am suggesting by creating three articles or by merging the articles or by a disambiguion page I have no strong opinions, I am not that experienced in the Wikipedia technicalities. The important thing is that the term muscle memory describes a phenomenon, as outlined Muscle memory (definition). There are, however, two documented biological explanations for this phenomenon, Muscle memory (motor learning), Muscle memory (strength training) these explanations are not mutually exclusive.  If someone more experienced in Wikipedia editing can merge the three articles now related to muscle memory that would be fine User:Muskel  —Preceding undated comment added 00:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC).
 * You forgot to reveal that you are the creator of this article (as well as Muscle memory (strength training)). I don't understand your recommendation. There is nothing of substance in this article that is not already in Muscle memory (strength training), so merging this article to there is a void action, and surely you don't want Muscle memory (definition) to be a page that simply redirects to Muscle memory (strength training). As I see it the term "muscle memory" is in use for two entirely unrelated phenomena for which it does not make sense to propose that they be treated in Wikipedia as a single phenomenon with a single definition and two different not mutually exclusive biological explanations. These unrelated phenomena are best dealt with in separate articles. The pop science term for motor learning is by far the more common use of the term. --Lambiam 13:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per RJH. HHaeyyn89 (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2011 (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.