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. After two weeks of discussion there certainly isn't any consensus to delete. There are several ideas here for improvement, which will hopefully now happen.
Michig (
talk) 07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)reply
This article is not encyclopedic, relates to a neologism that is not commonly-accepted terminology or notable, and is primarily OR.
LT910001 (
talk) 22:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep-- I feel deletion is a bit harsh for this topic. I cannot access the pdf sources as an off campus login pops up and one of the text books. The other text book does talk about gender bias in the diagnosis of personality disorders. I believe there are sources which relate to this topic, even if they do not use this exact phrase. This is a list of PubMed results with "gender bias diagnosis" in the title, and many appear to be related to this topic:
[1] I therefore feel it is worthwhile to preserve this and hopefully in time interested parties will improve it and add
WP:MEDRS sources.
Lesion (
talk) 11:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Might be an idea to rename the article "Gender bias in diagnosis" or even merge it to a subsection of
Medical diagnosis.
Lesion (
talk) 11:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Support merge, I would support a merge or rename as you propose.
LT910001 (
talk) 11:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep, good deal of copyediting needed but has good source coverage. — Cirt (
talk) 00:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 00:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Weak keep, through I wonder if rename to
Gender-bias in diagnosing wouldn't be better. I am not convinced there is a valid merge target; the subject appears somewhat notable and well defined (through the article is not written clearly enough to make even its very topic easy to understand for most casual readers). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 06:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
"Gender bias in diagnosis" would be more correct? And question need for a hyphen between gender and bias...
Lesion (
talk) 09:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep but fix This article could be done better, yes it references sources and links to pages in a relevant manner but the wall of text needs to be more concise and easier to read. ~Frosty(
Talk page) 05:44, 31 October 2013 (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.
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. After two weeks of discussion there certainly isn't any consensus to delete. There are several ideas here for improvement, which will hopefully now happen.
Michig (
talk) 07:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)reply
This article is not encyclopedic, relates to a neologism that is not commonly-accepted terminology or notable, and is primarily OR.
LT910001 (
talk) 22:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep-- I feel deletion is a bit harsh for this topic. I cannot access the pdf sources as an off campus login pops up and one of the text books. The other text book does talk about gender bias in the diagnosis of personality disorders. I believe there are sources which relate to this topic, even if they do not use this exact phrase. This is a list of PubMed results with "gender bias diagnosis" in the title, and many appear to be related to this topic:
[1] I therefore feel it is worthwhile to preserve this and hopefully in time interested parties will improve it and add
WP:MEDRS sources.
Lesion (
talk) 11:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Might be an idea to rename the article "Gender bias in diagnosis" or even merge it to a subsection of
Medical diagnosis.
Lesion (
talk) 11:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Support merge, I would support a merge or rename as you propose.
LT910001 (
talk) 11:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep, good deal of copyediting needed but has good source coverage. — Cirt (
talk) 00:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Mark Arsten (
talk) 00:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Weak keep, through I wonder if rename to
Gender-bias in diagnosing wouldn't be better. I am not convinced there is a valid merge target; the subject appears somewhat notable and well defined (through the article is not written clearly enough to make even its very topic easy to understand for most casual readers). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 06:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
"Gender bias in diagnosis" would be more correct? And question need for a hyphen between gender and bias...
Lesion (
talk) 09:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Keep but fix This article could be done better, yes it references sources and links to pages in a relevant manner but the wall of text needs to be more concise and easier to read. ~Frosty(
Talk page) 05:44, 31 October 2013 (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.