Talk:Phantom vibration syndrome

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Phantom vibration syndrome. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Phantom vibration syndrome at the Reference desk.

This article was nominated for deletion on September 4 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Daniel Finkelstein (27 August 2009). "The 10 best wikipedia entries". The Times.

Proposed change

At the time of the creation of this article, it seems it was but a mere neologism. However, there are several sources that indicate this is more properly named 'phantom ring' or 'phantom ring syndrome.' I'm wondering if we can redirect this to one of the aforementioned names and recreate the article there. I would like this article to redirect to such a name. Feedback? the_undertow ^talk 04:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I for one don't really care which title wins; the content is what's important. "Phantom ring" could also mean a part of a gyroscope, but I don't know how common that usage is. So, do whatever you think is best. Melchoir 06:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and have so moved. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Someone here might be able to integrated this information into the article better than I. ScienceDaily.com http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070914165302.htm New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/fashion/thursdaystyles/04phan.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-06-12-cellphones_N.htm?csp=34 --24.103.173.3 (talk) 07:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

An entire article based on one newspaper article - in turn based on a students paper ? This is possibly the most embarrassing and pointless article on wikipedia. Desperate stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.171.17 (talk) 21:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

citation for claim re: spatial location of audio frequencies

The article intro includes this sentence: "This frequency range can generally be more difficult to locate spatially." A citation for this sentence would be nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.36.134.187 (talk) 23:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Rename and move to Phantom Vibration Syndrome

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Move to Phantom Vibration Syndrome. -- PBS (talk) 17:52, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phantom ringing → Phantom Vibration Syndrome – Request made 9 May 2012 by user:Wall Screamer using template:movenotice. Reason given by Wall Screamer is "Recent scientific research] has dubbed the phenomenon (at least when it refers to vibrations, not to ringing) as 'phantom vibration syndrome'." Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 08:30, 7 October 2012 (UTC) -- PBS (talk) 12:07, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page seems to based mostly on speculation, and the few citations it does have are non-scientific news reports. Recent scientific research has dubbed the phenomenon (at least when it refers to vibrations, not to ringing) as "phantom vibration syndrome." The scientific seems to be on the sensation of vibration, rather than ringing. I'm not sure phantom ringing is notable or scientific; and I personally would argue that phantom ringing is merely one of many mild sensory hallucinations people experience on a regular basis. Obviously, PVS should have an article about it, and my initial response is to rename this article and rewrite it, focusing instead on vibration and only mentioning ringing, perhaps giving it its own section. However, this is obviously a very drastic change, and perhaps Phantom Vibration Syndrome should have its own page entirely (which I would also be happy to create), and this page should be left alone. Input? Wall Screamer (talk) 00:00, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there are several scientific papers on the subject, it's verifiable, which is enough for inclusion in Wikipedia according to policy (despite what some deletionists might say). Obviously the thing to do is add the aforementioned research to the article. Yes PVS does seem to be the name used when referring to vibrations, but this article includes sound also. I think if you have stuff to write about PVS that *isn't* about phones, put it in Phantom Vibration Syndrome, otherwise add to this article. ··gracefool☺ 07:09, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I support the creation of the Phantom Vibration Syndrome article. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 18:48, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Possibly Biased

Due to how little coverage this has and that most of the source comes from news articles it seems to have a slight towards excessive mobile phone usage. A position that doesn't completely conform to neutrality policy. Any suggestions on how to help this? --Ridingj1 (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Biofeedback?

Soon after I got my first cell phone I started occasionally getting phantom vibrations on the spot on my thigh above which my phone usually sat in my pocket. This could happen with the power on or off, in range of a cell tower or not, and even if the phone wasn't in my pocket. I switched to the pocket on the other leg and after a few days the phenomenon ceased, but then started up on the new site. This went on for a couple of years but eventually petered out; now it's been gone for years. Could these possibly be micro-muscular twitches as a biofeedback response to the mechanical vibrations or (supposedly harmless) radio waves?2600:1700:5DD0:60A0:148E:1109:C40F:8DBA (talk) 13:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]