Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vibration white finger

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was keep. - Sikon 10:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vibration white finger
I am very upset with wikipedia admin, how are they allowed to say something is patent nonsense just because it has silly name? Do they have knowledge of every subject in exist? I doubt it, they should be forced to search google before being allowed to delete stuff with no vote! i think it is disgust. I recreate perfectly good stub twice and both times it is patent nonsese deleted by RickK and CesarB. well you are idiots, because it is real. Myabe if i put it on vfd you will have to spend the 10 seconds to put it in google and see the two hiundred thousand hits it gets. that is not bad for patent nonsese hey? keep the article, and delete the admins who delete without checking.


 * keep I'm a nice admin, I've heard of it, though it may be known under another name elsewhere. 09:55, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * NB though to be fair the original article did meet the speedy criteria as being a practically useless substub. Dunc|&#9786; 09:57, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Original article was "vibration white finger turns fingers white and numb, miners get it. welsh miners sue the government if they get it". Could have been cleaned up rather than speedied. Kappa 10:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but the right place to bring this up would have been Votes for Undeletion. the wub (talk) 11:13, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It would have stayed deleted at votes for undeletion, because the only evidence would have been the original article. Kappa 11:24, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: References to medical journals or websites will help to raise the believability of the article. With 200,000 claimed hits that shouldn't be much of a problem. - Mgm|(talk) 11:19, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Note actual Google hit count is 674, and at least some of those are about a band of the same name. It's definitely real, but nowhere near the 200K hits claimed. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  11:38, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * In what sense is the google count which attempts to exlude similar pages the only "actual google count"? Kappa 13:12, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The way I see it, if Google doesn't feel that it needs to include duplicate results in its searches, I see no reason to disagree with them. I've tried looking through the duplicate results before, there's never anything good in there.  For example, if I look for all Google results for my own name, including the duplicates, it gives me dozens of pages of GeoURL results lists. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  22:17, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Raynaud's Disease Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 11:33, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've expanded it. The number of google hits isn't the key thing, it's the importance of the hits that are there. Average Earthman 12:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds like it could be related to Repetitive Strain Injury and could be merged. Just a thought, I remain ambivalent at this time. -- WCFrancis 17:29, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It isn't (apart from them being workplace injuries affecting the fingers). RSI is from the individual repeating the same movement, this is a consequence of vibrating machinery causing blood flow restriction. This should be clear from the article, I'd hope (since I rewrote it). Average Earthman 08:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to be a notable workplace injury. Double Blue  (Talk) 18:25, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. How many other articles are being incorrectly speedy deleted by administrators? I am glad this user brought this to our attention, please contact me so I can help if administrators are deleting valid articles. --ShaunMacPherson 22:12, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I do not think I was wrong on speedy deleting it as nonsense. The way it was written the first time ("vibration white finger turns fingers white and numb, miners get it. welsh miners sue the government if they get it.") makes no sense without extra context. In fact, if I saw an article like that again, I believe I would delete it exactly the same way. And even if it couldn't be considered nonsense, it could still be speedy deleted as WP:CSD criteria A1: a very short article with little or no context. That all said, keep as it now makes sense and has context. --cesarb 23:08, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Good work Earthman. JamesBurns 06:45, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep A valid medical complaint --StoatBringer 23:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.