Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qumsieh's 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 delete. Sr13 01:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Qumsieh's syndrome

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a description of a rare form of headache that doesn't respond to a painkiller. All very good, until we find out that it has not yet been published, and there is a reasonable chance it will not be accepted for publication. There is also a reasonable chance it will not be named after the medical student who claims to have discovered it. Delete, WP:NOR. JFW | T@lk  22:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:V, and a previous version said that there is only one documented case. BassoProfundo 22:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Indomethacin resistant hemicrania continua has been discussed in several journal articles the primary example is this pubmed article: Kuritzky A: Indomethacin-resistant hemicrania continua. Cephalalgia 1992, 12:57-59. View the PubMed notation for this reference. In addition, your correct, Qumsieh's syndrome is yet to be accepted by peer review jourals, but will be submitted in July, this condition exists and at very least an article comparing and contrasting or describing the condition should be allowed. Your not basing your judgement on science as it seems you don't know anything about headaches.  This particular headache does not respond to painkillers completely.  At first there is a decrease in the magnitude of pain then resistance develops.  This particular patient continues to have the same headache described under Hemicrania continua but is not responding to indomethacin.  In addition, no autonomic features are present.  I don't care if the medical student has his name on it or not this is an issue of describing a disease variant.  Describing, not diagnosing or treating.  Please be reasonable user jfdwolff.  vote for no deletion.  thanks  Hitman123 22:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I submit that your statement "it seems you don't know anything about headaches" constitutes a personal attack. Substantial arguments have been given in addition to whether it is your interpretation that this syndrome exists. Why call it Qumsieh's syndrome (is that you?) if Kuritzky already gave a good definition? JFW | T@lk  15:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Kill it. This is an encyclopedia. Bring it back after it makes it to a review article or medical textbook. alteripse 23:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. There are 0 (zero) PubMed hits for "Qumsieh's syndrome". Which means that, medically speaking, this syndrome doesn't exist. Violates No original research and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. When it's been published somewhere reliable, then it could be considered for inclusion. Also, syndromes are not usually defined based on 1 patient; no evidence that this eponym is going to be used, even assuming that "indomethacin-resistant hemicrania" is someday accepted as a separate syndrome (there's a general move away from eponyms these days); zero reliable sources; I'd go on, but I'm getting an NSAID-resistant headache. MastCell Talk 23:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * By admission there are no peer-revied scholarly sources on this article. The minimum borderline for an article's inclusion is that information on the subject must be verifiable through the use of reliable sources. Delete until such a time as peer-reviewed scholarly sources are published in medical journals. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your findings. -- saberwyn 23:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - no WP:RS yet published, presumption that it will (but I do wish you luck) and more likely would be named after the descriptive name than the initial researcher. Even if published, I would disagree with Alteripse, in that as just a single case report I would not have thought it would meet the criteria for being WP:Notable; instead might warrent an additional paragraph in hemicrania continua, along with IRHC. David Ruben Talk 01:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - per nom & others above. -RustavoTalk/Contribs 03:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Feel free to rewrite this article after it has been covered in multiple reliable, scholarly sources. Also, as the nominator and David Ruben above, I doubt this will be eponymous, (if) when it becomes a recognized entity. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 12:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. If and when the peer-reviewed article is published would have been a good time to write this up; better would be when the follow-up study confirms the result. Until then this fails WP:OR. -- MarcoTolo 01:46, 13 June 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.