Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weeping Eczema


 * 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   redirect to Eczema. I think it's an obvious solution.  DGG ( talk ) 04:38, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Weeping Eczema

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Ah, is there an ICD 9 code? This is like saying "pneumonia with a fever" Weeping eczema just means it is wet. It is not an independent condition. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:30, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per the Doc. I don't think we need a medical article referenced to a 1904 book and Adele Davis, who peddled erroneous nutritional theories before her 1974 death. We already have a far better article about Eczema, based on current reliable sources. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  08:28, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with above deletion rationales. Even if properly written and sourced, this would be a content fork. -- Scray (talk) 21:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Agree with above. Carlos Rivas (talk) 09:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Rename. The reason I wrote a separate article on Weeping Eczema is it is an obsolete term that identifies a systemic disease that is distinct from a wet form of common eczema.  When I did a Google Scholar search on "Weeping Eczema", the only reference I found was the 1904 book I cited.  This 1904 book described this narrowly defined disease in detail.  It probably has a technical term now that I do not know, that distinguishes this disease from common wet eczema.  It also has a specific cause related to folate and paba metabolism.  Hopefully one of you can identify this narrowly defined disease by providing the technical term. That would eliminate the need for my questionable references. Greensburger (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Summarize it in the history section of the eczema article if you can find a modern reference that comments on it. If not probably not notable / no longer exists. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 03:25, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

As an aid to identifying this disease, I quote excerpts from the 1904 book by William H. Bain:

"The first stage ... is erythematous eczema..., a patchy redness with diffuse outline, always associated with more or less oedema of the superficial part of the corium. It is seen chiefly on the face, penis and scrotum, and is limited to those parts where the epidermis is very thin...

The next stage is knows as papular eczema... This early papule is an unripe vesicle, being formed by the presence of a collection of serum deep in the epidermis.

In the next stage, known as vesicular eczema, the collection of fluid has grown large enough and pushed sufficiently near the surface to be obvious to the naked eye as a vesicle.

The vesicles soon burst as a rule and being replaced by a red exuding surface known as weeping eczema or eczema madidans...

A crust forms from the dried and coagulated serum... The consistence of the skin is stiff and it appears thickened from the presence of superficial oedema...

The horny layer in this form is not produced in the normal manner, remaining too moist and not sufficiently greasy, thus constituting a stiff and brittle covering, rather than the supple, water-proof, normal surface..."

I summarize: Weeping eczena of this kind occurs chiefly in skin having very thin epidermis. The skin becomes stiff and brittle forming cracks that exude fluid.

Pubmed yields the following from J. Dermatology, linking folate deficiency to psoriasis, rather than to eczema, a distinction that perhaps was not made when Bain wrote his book:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5557509?dopt=Abstract

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4759946

Greensburger (talk) 21:53, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete We certainly do not need an article for an obsolete terminology that neither has historical significance, and lacks verifiable secondary sources. This is not knowledge. Chhandama (talk) 11:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Eczema. Appears to be an actual term http://health.howstuffworks.com/skin-care/problems/medical/eczema2.htm. --Mr. Guye (talk) 21:34, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree with redirect Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:45, 16 November 2014 (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.