382:
307:
The cited sources are completely unreliable for encyclopedic content that would suggest people are at risk for dying from common acts such as wearing polyester, touching a balloon, or brushing their hair - that's just irresponsible unless supported by reliable biomedical sources. The evidence
271:
MEDRS says (paragraph 1 of lede): "Therefore, it is vital that the biomedical information in all types of articles be based on reliable, third-party, published sources and accurately reflect current medical knowledge." I say "unconvincing" because the media reports do not provide a link to a
345:
omment. Under the current title, this article does not cover a notable subject. Unusual cases only reported in the popular press do not make for good encyclopedia articles. In this case, the medical team are speculating about the mechanism, but it seems like an extreme form of
118:
291:
reflect all that is known (which isn't much) about this syndrome. Again, what provisions does MEDRS make for instances where, because of the novelty or rarity of the condition, no journal articles exist?
365:
Yup. AfD it - and point out to the contributor responsible that citing multiple sources which in turn state that they got the story from a source already cited isn't a way to demonstrate notability.
407:
272:
reliable source, and simply refer to "doctors" without verifying credentials. There's no peer review evident. It's a biomedical claim with NO reliable evidence. --
308:
provided is even weaker than single case reports published in peer-reviewed biomedical literature, and we discourage incorporation into WP of claims from those. --
350:(which Nikkimaria created yesterday but has some backup in medical sources). I am very much inclined to send the current article for AFD on grounds of notability.
36:
241:
Neither supported by MEDRS nor convincingly reported in the popular press. Certainly should not be a DYK without better sourcing. --
164:
Agreed but there are no journal sources as of yet, so the news sources are the best currently available (to my knowledge, at least).
17:
256:
Hey Scray, what do you mean by "no convincingly reported"? And what does MEDRS suggest when there are no journals available?
179:
Do you mind if I ping Sandy or another Med editor, as I'm not familiar with their guidelines in such cases? —
44:
40:
82:
370:
103:
385:
Since it's pretty clear this article won't be able to incorporate sources that don't exist, withdrawing.
347:
305:
The popular press is generally not a reliable source for scientific and medical information in articles.
222:
184:
154:
65:
390:
297:
261:
199:
169:
132:
355:
324:
29:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
366:
218:
180:
150:
61:
386:
313:
304:
293:
277:
257:
246:
195:
165:
146:
128:
319:
Layman's opinion. Rubbish article and a candidate for deletion.... no reliable sources.
401:
351:
320:
381:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
309:
273:
242:
98:
287:
reliable third-party published sources, and as far as I can tell they
47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.
194:
Sure - maybe someone'll have an idea of where to find more sources.
214:
210:
87:
303:
Sorry, I should have been more explicit about that:
8:
135:). Self nom at 21:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
49:No further edits should be made to this page
408:Failed DYK nominations from January 2013
145:This seems to be an article for which
7:
24:
119:Kathleen Simon, Viscountess Simon
18:Template:Did you know nominations
380:
316:) 05:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
300:) 05:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
280:) 04:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify this page.
393:) 13:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
373:) 07:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
327:) 06:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
264:) 04:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
249:) 04:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
225:) 01:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
202:) 00:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
187:) 00:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
172:) 00:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
157:) 00:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
68:) 13:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
1:
360:06:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
45:Knowledge talk:Did you know
37:this nomination's talk page
424:
107:are all potentially fatal?
149:would apply. —
101:, touching balloons, and
41:the article's talk page
74:Hair-brushing syndrome
348:Hair-grooming syncope
354: |
104:brushing your hair
358:
283:The sources used
136:
97:... that wearing
415:
384:
356:
209:Alright, pinged
126:
60:by —
56:The result was:
34:
423:
422:
418:
417:
416:
414:
413:
412:
398:
397:
396:
94:
92:
88:Article history
76:
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
421:
419:
411:
410:
400:
399:
395:
394:
377:
376:
375:
374:
362:
361:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
266:
265:
251:
250:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
230:
229:
228:
227:
226:
217:. —
204:
203:
189:
188:
174:
173:
159:
158:
124:
123:
122:
121:
109:
108:
91:
90:
85:
83:Back to T:TDYK
79:
77:
75:
72:
54:
53:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
420:
409:
406:
405:
403:
392:
388:
383:
379:
378:
372:
368:
364:
363:
359:
353:
349:
344:
341:
340:
326:
322:
318:
317:
315:
311:
306:
302:
301:
299:
295:
290:
286:
282:
281:
279:
275:
270:
269:
268:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
253:
252:
248:
244:
240:
237:
236:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
207:
206:
205:
201:
197:
193:
192:
191:
190:
186:
182:
178:
177:
176:
175:
171:
167:
163:
162:
161:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
141:
140:
139:
138:
137:
134:
130:
120:
116:
113:
112:
111:
110:
106:
105:
100:
96:
95:
89:
86:
84:
81:
80:
73:
71:
67:
63:
59:
52:
50:
46:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
367:AndyTheGrump
342:
288:
284:
238:
142:
127:Created by
125:
114:
102:
57:
55:
48:
31:
28:
219:Crisco 1492
181:Crisco 1492
151:Crisco 1492
62:Crisco 1492
387:Nikkimaria
294:Nikkimaria
258:Nikkimaria
196:Nikkimaria
166:Nikkimaria
129:Nikkimaria
70:Withdrawn
99:polyester
402:Category
321:Ariconte
115:Reviewed
58:rejected
239:Comment
143:Comment
310:Scray
274:Scray
243:Scray
147:MEDRS
16:<
391:talk
371:talk
357:T@lk
325:talk
314:talk
298:talk
278:talk
262:talk
247:talk
223:talk
215:here
213:and
211:here
200:talk
185:talk
170:talk
155:talk
133:talk
66:talk
352:JFW
285:are
43:or
404::
289:do
117::
78:(
39:,
389:(
369:(
343:C
323:(
312:(
296:(
276:(
260:(
245:(
221:(
198:(
183:(
168:(
153:(
131:(
93:)
64:(
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.