The result was redirect to Hair-grooming syncope. MBisanz talk 00:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC) reply
As discussed here, the topic of the article is not clearly notable, and the sources are both self-referential and fail WP:MEDRS. Lacking proper sources, this topic is highly dubious and possibly misleading. Scray ( talk) 13:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Weak keep. The introductory sentence "Hair-brushing syndrome is a rare condition in which static electricity causes a potentially fatal interruption in brain function or neurological communication with the body organs" is false. It should say "Hair-brushing syndrome is a pseudoscientific medical syndrome invented by tabloid newspapers to sensationalize an incidental event." (Admittedly, this is my original research, without a reliable source.) As far as I can tell, the girl suffered one event that occurred while her mother was brushing her hair. My guess: someone happened to mention "static electricity", and the mother latched onto this. Now the poor girl is going through life with this pointless geas. This "syndrome" is never going to receive serious medical investigation because there is nothing to investigate.
However Nikkimaria is right to point out that the "syndrome" has received significant coverage in newspapers. These sources are not suitable for medical articles. Therefore this article must be presented as a non-medical article. There is value in keeping an article in Wikipedia, because readers could potentially come to Wikipedia to find out about the "syndrome". The article needs to be re-written to avoid any implication that the "syndrome" is medically validated. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Hair-grooming syncope. MBisanz talk 00:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC) reply
As discussed here, the topic of the article is not clearly notable, and the sources are both self-referential and fail WP:MEDRS. Lacking proper sources, this topic is highly dubious and possibly misleading. Scray ( talk) 13:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Weak keep. The introductory sentence "Hair-brushing syndrome is a rare condition in which static electricity causes a potentially fatal interruption in brain function or neurological communication with the body organs" is false. It should say "Hair-brushing syndrome is a pseudoscientific medical syndrome invented by tabloid newspapers to sensationalize an incidental event." (Admittedly, this is my original research, without a reliable source.) As far as I can tell, the girl suffered one event that occurred while her mother was brushing her hair. My guess: someone happened to mention "static electricity", and the mother latched onto this. Now the poor girl is going through life with this pointless geas. This "syndrome" is never going to receive serious medical investigation because there is nothing to investigate.
However Nikkimaria is right to point out that the "syndrome" has received significant coverage in newspapers. These sources are not suitable for medical articles. Therefore this article must be presented as a non-medical article. There is value in keeping an article in Wikipedia, because readers could potentially come to Wikipedia to find out about the "syndrome". The article needs to be re-written to avoid any implication that the "syndrome" is medically validated. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC) reply