Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surgical Incisions

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Peter Karlsen (talk) 01:18, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surgical Incisions

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

Creator admits on talkpage that this mostly empty list could only be filled via WP:OR. The intro reads like an essay. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 13:55, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both you and the creator were wrong, then. You really should have checked the statement for yourself. I found Agnew's, Bergmann's, Fergusson's, Mackenrodt's, and Warren's incisions in ISBN 9782294701672. I stopped after those. A good overall introduction to the topic of surgical incisions was relatively easy to find by just looking in the introductory chapters of a textbook of surgery, and finding ISBN 9781405126274 pp. 31. A textbook on general surgical principles yielded a typology of abdominal incisions, complete with diagram, at ISBN 9780781750035 pp. 229.
Turning from the textbooks to the encyclopaedias, I find that ISBN 9780813826028 has articles on the internal Bevel incision, the extrasulcular incision, and the Crestal incision; ISBN 9780787677237 has an article on the subject of incision care (pp. 743 et seq.); and ISBN 9780816062850 has articles on the anchor incision, the various incision placement guidelines that there are, W-plasty, Y-plasty, and Z-plasty, a redirect for the h-flap incision, and the doughnut incision and short scar incision (a.k.a. lollipop incision) as sections under breast reduction.
Have you considered the possibility that writing about this sort of stuff is what Wikipedia is in some need of? Uncle G (talk) 16:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly have; but not in this form. I still believe this cannot be fixed, but if others want to try, of course, go ahead. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 01:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP I agree with Uncle G (talk) Wikipedia is indeed in need of such articles but its just need some expansion and betterment. I guess Wikipedia is made for use of all people equally well. BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 20:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per G but move to Surgical incision per WP:SINGULAR and lowercasing. Good stub/start. JJB 21:07, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for appreciation BurhanAhmed (talk • contribs) 20:45, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hippocrates: "First, do no harm". Colonel Warden (talk) 19:39, 24 October 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.