Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supernumerary nose


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Supernumerary nose

 * – (View AfD (View log  •  AfD statistics)

notability Perfection (talk) 01:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC) Almost no google hits, I'm not even sure that these things exist --Perfection (talk) 01:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. I smell a hoax.  -- RoySmith (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Based on Google Results:
 * Scholar: One relevant hit at the U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health - however, I cannot access the actual text
 * Books: 39 hits, ranging from the 1800 up to about 2003. Not all of them are relevant, but some appear to be, but none of them seem to be significant coverage. See my note below
 * News: Nothing
 * Images: Nothing suitable
 * Search: Mainly blogs, forums, wikis - or the scholar/book links
 * All the cases in the relevant "Book" hits were either describing a third nostril on a single nose (technically a "supernumerary nostril") or a congenital double fistula of the lower lip. The "Scholar" result may be about one of these conditions - as the original Chinese article cannot be found online, I have no way of verifying whether it is or not.
 * With these results, I find insufficient evidence that anyone has ever had this condition, and so I can see no reason to have an article about a subject which is theoretical at best, impossible at worst. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 02:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. This isn't a hoax, it's a bad joke.  Somebody just popped this one out of their nose, I guess.  Would be BJAODN material if it were around, but still, at least I got a good laugh from this. =^_^= -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 04:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Impressive name "supernumerary" in this case means "more than one". Unsourced, nothing but a defenition.  We're all turning up our noses on this one, and even a person with only one nose can tell that this article stinks.  If there's a source for the term, it can be mentioned in birth defect, although it seems to be a rare one. Mandsford (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to Supernumerary body part. Mangoe (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Just read the article, it's stupid (one is at the right and the other at the left). It makes me laugh, really. -- MisterWiki  talk   contribs  22:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The evidence there is such a thing as supernumerary nostrils should be covered in Supernumerary body part per the books mentioned earlier. Does anyone know someone in China who can look up the original text for the Google scholar pubmed citation? If it can be found and verified to contain an actual case, that should be merged too. - Mgm|(talk) 10:04, 11 December 2009 (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.