Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epineurial repair: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by Jgore3 - "→Epineurial repair: " |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*'''Delete''' the article's content is a near total loss as it's almost all how-to. What remains, and what should be there, could be a section in [[epineurium]]. -- [[User:Scray|Scray]] ([[User talk:Scray|talk]]) 12:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' the article's content is a near total loss as it's almost all how-to. What remains, and what should be there, could be a section in [[epineurium]]. -- [[User:Scray|Scray]] ([[User talk:Scray|talk]]) 12:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Has it horrible style issues? Yes. Can they be solved by editing? Yes. Therefore, are they a reason to delete? [[WP:ATD|No]]. Does it pass [[WP:GNG]]? Hell yes, lots of references in academic RS in the article. What do we do? We keep it. --[[User:Cyclopia|<font color="green">Cycl</font><big>o</big><font color="green">pia</font>]][[User talk:Cyclopia|<font color="red"><sup>talk</sup></font>]] 14:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Has it horrible style issues? Yes. Can they be solved by editing? Yes. Therefore, are they a reason to delete? [[WP:ATD|No]]. Does it pass [[WP:GNG]]? Hell yes, lots of references in academic RS in the article. What do we do? We keep it. --[[User:Cyclopia|<font color="green">Cycl</font><big>o</big><font color="green">pia</font>]][[User talk:Cyclopia|<font color="red"><sup>talk</sup></font>]] 14:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Don't care if it stays up. Just need it up until December 18th to get credit for a into to neuroscience class. I was trying to write it for a lay person to understand the the viewpoint of the surgeon. If some one uses this as a how-to guide, Darwinism takes over. |
*'''Keep''' Don't care if it stays up. Just need it up until December 18th to get credit for a into to neuroscience class. I was trying to write it for a lay person to understand the the viewpoint of the surgeon. If some one uses this as a how-to guide, Darwinism takes over. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jgore3|Jgore3]] ([[User talk:Jgore3|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jgore3|contribs]]) 15:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Revision as of 15:31, 26 November 2012
Epineurial repair
- Epineurial repair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Editor stated in edit summary that this is his thesis. It's a how-to guide of a medical procedure to repair the epineurium. The encyclopedia is not the place for essays or how-to guides. PROD removed. Cindy(talk to me) 19:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. The procedure needs to be rephrased, though, so it's a discussion or description rather than a step-by-step how-to guide. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Delete the article's content is a near total loss as it's almost all how-to. What remains, and what should be there, could be a section in epineurium. -- Scray (talk) 12:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Has it horrible style issues? Yes. Can they be solved by editing? Yes. Therefore, are they a reason to delete? No. Does it pass WP:GNG? Hell yes, lots of references in academic RS in the article. What do we do? We keep it. --Cyclopiatalk 14:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Don't care if it stays up. Just need it up until December 18th to get credit for a into to neuroscience class. I was trying to write it for a lay person to understand the the viewpoint of the surgeon. If some one uses this as a how-to guide, Darwinism takes over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgore3 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)