Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/THD method: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 06:34, 31 January 2022

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

THD method

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Spotted this on patrols this morning. It's not explicitely spam, but sure feels a little spammy due to the peacockishness of this. (Hemorrhoids are the most feared? I'd be more worried about rectal cancer!) It boils down to that this appears to be an essay explaining this technique in removing hemorrhoids - and beyond promotional tone, not a lot more than that. Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to append the nomination with the related article:

I came across the second article while checking if the text was copied from elsewhere. The presence of a second article supports the spam hypothesis.Novangelis (talk) 02:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HAL appeared to be the same text as THD method so I have deleted it and another copy at Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless external links providing evidence of notability are provided. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect. Since my supplemental nomination has gone as a speedy, I will comment on the named article. The subject appears in PubMed under the various article names, but that is about it. Based on the limited data (one recent review remarked on the poor quality of studies), I do not think that there is enough to support an article at this time. The ad-like enthusiasm makes the current text unsuitable for a merge (e.g. it is described as painless, but post-operative pain effects 18.5% of patients). The procedure description at Hemorrhoid#Procedures (a potential redirect target) is more useful than anything in this article.Novangelis (talk) 02:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Revision as of 17:30, 8 August 2021 edit MalnadachBot (talk \| contribs) 11,637,095 edits m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2) Tag: AWB ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 06:34, 31 January 2022 edit undo MalnadachBot (talk \| contribs) 11,637,095 edits m Added missing end tags to discussion close footer to reduce Lint errors. (Task 12) Tag: AWB
Line 21:		Line 21:
	*'''Delete''' or redirect. Since my supplemental nomination has gone as a speedy, I will comment on the named article. The subject appears in PubMed under the various article names, but that is about it. Based on the limited data ([http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19690499 one recent review remarked on the poor quality of studies]), I do not think that there is enough to support an article at this time. The ad-like enthusiasm makes the current text unsuitable for a merge (''e.g.'' it is described as painless, but post-operative pain effects 18.5% of patients). The procedure description at [[Hemorrhoid#Procedures]] (a potential redirect target) is more useful than anything in this article.[[User:Novangelis\|Novangelis]] ([[User talk:Novangelis\|talk]]) 02:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)		*'''Delete''' or redirect. Since my supplemental nomination has gone as a speedy, I will comment on the named article. The subject appears in PubMed under the various article names, but that is about it. Based on the limited data ([http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19690499 one recent review remarked on the poor quality of studies]), I do not think that there is enough to support an article at this time. The ad-like enthusiasm makes the current text unsuitable for a merge (''e.g.'' it is described as painless, but post-operative pain effects 18.5% of patients). The procedure description at [[Hemorrhoid#Procedures]] (a potential redirect target) is more useful than anything in this article.[[User:Novangelis\|Novangelis]] ([[User talk:Novangelis\|talk]]) 02:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

	:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review\|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>		:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review\|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>