Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oligodactyly


 * 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 closure) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Oligodactyly

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not enough for more than a dictionary definition, per WP:DICDEF. References are very brief (definitions, and then only going into detail for specific conditions). The 2nd para of the article is all about Ectrodactyly, which has an article. So, other than the meaning of the word, I see no discernable content. Only the first few words are actually about the topic. Smappy (talk) 03:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Only the first statement is a definition; the rest of the article provides the required encyclopedic analysis of the topic. Numerous articles on Google Scholar show that this term is notable within the medical establishment and I can't imagine any other reasons that this article goes against our policies or guidelines.  Them  From  Space  07:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a recognised medical condition.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  01:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article should be expanded, not deleted. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 01:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: virtually all medical illnesses are notable, and Internet searches prove this. I am still working on this, for Pete's sake!  The nominator needs to notify the people who have worked to rescue this article. Bearian (talk) 02:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per everyone above.  /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 10:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Real medical condition with a differential diagnosis and of embryological and teratological relevance. JFW | T@lk  17:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Has great potential. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, and SNOW close. Smappy, your comment about "I see no content" concerns me.  Are you aware that notability rules only require that some sources exist, somewhere in the world -- and not that the current version of the article WP:CITEs these sources, or fully describes the subject?  Surmountable problems, like "the article isn't finished yet" is on the list of invalid reasons for deletion.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep *sigh* This is a fine encyclopedic topic and the article has plenty of room for expansion. Perhaps some pictures of those with the condition, list of notable people that have suffered from it, etc.   D r e a m Focus  15:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Speedy keep - This could have been avoided by WP:BEFORE. There are nearly 1000 publications about this condition, some in highly respected journals. Ectrodactyly is a specific syndrome where the central digits are merged and a common (for a rare condition that is) example of oligodactyly, but not the only one. I've also added an image with description now (probably fair use as it's part of NLM, but I've already asked in the media copyright questions here ). There is a clear case of oligodactyly that's neither Poland Syndrome nor ectrodactyly published here: . Note that the fingers are not fused in this case, as in ectrodactyly or syndactyly. I'll see if we can get permission to use those images as well as they are great images and it's apparently difficult to understand the distinctions. Smocking (talk) 16:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep - Article is (now) a well-referenced article about a well-known and notable medical condition. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:42, 23 February 2010 (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.