197:). It saddens me that this ridiculousness has reached the level that it requires official debunking, but them's the facts. The article could use a good cleansing of poor content, crappy promotional sources affiliated with the subject, and perhaps even some agenda-driven editors, but the book is notable.
231:
I don't endorse this book, but it's out there and it had enough impact that breast cancer and other health organizations include responses to it. We have included these responses to bring needed balance. And removing this from
Knowledge won't help people who are researching this topic. Fringe? yes.
211:
Not sufficient published sources for this utterly non-notable book. The ACS describes the theory as an intenet rumor. TYhey are essentially obliged to dubunk everything they see, but we ignore the non-notable. Possibly there might be an article on the hypothesis, but it would be better to mention it
539:
I'd be really happy if a few of these 'keep' editors here would put this article on their watchlist. It's not a high-traffic page, but it is POV bait, and it feels like the same people are always reverting the same kinds of edits. (The IP address from the authors' home town, for example, has a
369:
we can see a large number of works discussing the topic, so this is actually a widely documented theory. In particular we have ""well-known, reliable, and independent sources which discuss the theory", the ACS and
Scientific America. Apparently 6.2% of US adults believe the theory, according to
517:
Wow that is some serious stupid. Mastcell more or less summarizes things well. DGG is not completely correct here because some of the sources are not in the business of debunking every little fringe idea. In particular, Scientific
American does not generally do this. We have multiple reliable
131:
to be notable enough for inclusion. I'll also note the article is currently unbalanced and if sledged for balance, only a stub would remain. A stub with the above fringe and notability problems withstanding. Please consider deletion based on the above rationale. Thank you for your time,
447:. The content of the book is irrelevant. The article shows sufficient sources to satisfy notability. If there is an issue with how the article is approached, that's a content issue and has nothing to do with AFD.
601:
116:
251:
367:
675:
277:
468:
the book's content, as stated, is irrelevant. We measure notability based on the coverage from reliable third parties, which this appears to have plenty of.
83:
78:
87:
613:. There are also several other books with titles starting with "Dressed to Kill" as well... ultimately hinting at the potential need for a dab page.
644:
concerns can be dealt with by focusing on media reaction to the book; "POV bait" concerns can be addressed with due diligence (with the occasional
70:
614:
630:. No matter how "wrong" or "incorrect" the book may be, there is no doubt that it has attracted widespread attention from independent,
17:
540:
particular way they want to spin the husband's dropping out, or being forced out, of all those grad school programs.)
735:
715:
699:
665:
622:
588:
574:
560:
549:
531:
509:
485:
460:
433:
415:
382:
357:
345:
292:
266:
241:
223:
203:
177:
141:
74:
52:
194:
155:
693:
451:
so the subject matter of the book, or its point of view, mean nothing with regards to its viability as an article.
409:
351:
339:
190:
750:
503:
36:
749:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
477:
137:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
725:
eep, but do NOT rename. It is a book about a controversial topic, and criticism is therefore to be expected.
424:. I agree it's pseudo-science, but that on its own doesn't seem to disqualify it for inclusion in Knowledge.
618:
151:
584:
545:
371:
163:
66:
58:
648:
should the editing heat rise). IP's points above are well-taken as there are other books with the title
448:
495:
470:
133:
306:, which requires some sort of following. Completely non-notable. Not even worth half a mention in
166:. There's nothing wrong with them, so long as they present a balanced viewpoint of their topics.)
730:
456:
172:
711:
580:
570:
541:
527:
429:
378:
288:
262:
237:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
661:
303:
186:
159:
124:
641:
519:
421:
706:
Well, that may not happen, but in the meantime, please consider contributing. Regards.
690:
645:
406:
336:
321:
726:
610:
556:
452:
307:
219:
199:
167:
707:
631:
566:
523:
425:
374:
284:
258:
233:
49:
104:
657:
162:, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have an article on the book. (We have
128:
392:
158:
on their web site. The theories which are presented in the book are definitely
682:
636:
398:
372:
Prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of beliefs regarding cancer risks
328:
313:
212:
in an article. As is, it's a drastic violation of fringe and undueweight.
679:. If we do that, I will take a serious attempt to clean up this article—
565:
Would it help to turn it into an article about the theory, not the book?
214:
676:
Criticism of "Dressed to Kill: The Link
Between Breast Cancer and Bras"
189:, in that mainstream sources have referenced (debunked) it (e.g.
743:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
123:
An entire article devoted to what appears to be criticism of an
579:
I don't think that it would make the least bit of difference.
602:
Dressed to Kill: The Link
Between Breast Cancer and Bras
111:
100:
96:
92:
127:, additionally, the book does not seem to have much
654:move to complete name per IP and dabify this page
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
753:). No further edits should be made to this page.
554:Amen to that. Watchlist it, my fellow editors.
252:list of Literature-related deletion discussions
518:sources. The article should of course reflect
278:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
8:
493:The book, however nonsensical, is notable.
164:plenty of articles on fringe-science topics
391:...and four million Americans have been
276:: This debate has been included in the
250:: This debate has been included in the
125:theory not widely documented or accepted
522:but that is not a reason for deletion.
7:
420:...and Knowledge has an article on
24:
156:responded to this book's claims
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
736:13:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
716:12:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
700:20:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
666:04:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
623:23:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
589:23:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
575:23:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
561:22:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
550:22:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
532:20:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
510:20:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
486:18:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
461:17:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
434:16:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
416:14:46, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
383:12:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
358:11:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
346:20:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
293:08:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
267:08:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
242:10:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
224:07:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
204:05:26, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
185:: Notable nonsense. Fulfills
178:04:59, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
142:04:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
53:01:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
232:But demonstrably notable.
770:
366:, looking at google books
150:. The fact alone that the
605:, its complete title, as
325:See my new opinion below—
746:Please do not modify it.
609:is also a 1952 novel by
32:Please do not modify it.
195:American Cancer Society
152:American Cancer Society
67:Dressed to Kill (book)
59:Dressed to Kill (book)
191:Scientific American
393:abducted by aliens
302:Not even close to
129:objective coverage
733:
295:
281:
269:
255:
761:
748:
731:
685:
632:reliable sources
502:
484:
480:
473:
401:
331:
316:
282:
272:
256:
246:
114:
108:
90:
44:The result was
34:
769:
768:
764:
763:
762:
760:
759:
758:
757:
751:deletion review
744:
696:
683:
650:Dressed to Kill
607:Dressed to Kill
500:
483:
478:
471:
469:
422:Alien abduction
412:
399:
354:
342:
329:
314:
176:
110:
81:
65:
62:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
767:
765:
756:
755:
739:
738:
719:
718:
703:
702:
694:
668:
646:semiprotection
628:Reluctant keep
625:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
534:
512:
488:
475:
472:coccyx bloccyx
463:
449:WP:NOTCENSORED
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
410:
386:
385:
352:
349:
348:
340:
296:
270:
244:
226:
206:
180:
170:
134:NonvocalScream
121:
120:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
766:
754:
752:
747:
741:
740:
737:
734:
728:
724:
721:
720:
717:
713:
709:
705:
704:
701:
697:
691:
688:
687:
686:
678:
677:
672:
669:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
639:
638:
633:
629:
626:
624:
620:
616:
615:147.70.242.54
612:
611:Peter Cheyney
608:
604:
603:
598:
590:
586:
582:
578:
577:
576:
572:
568:
564:
563:
562:
559:
558:
553:
552:
551:
547:
543:
538:
535:
533:
529:
525:
521:
516:
513:
511:
508:
507:
506:
499:
498:
492:
489:
487:
482:
481:
474:
467:
464:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
443:
442:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
418:
417:
413:
407:
404:
403:
402:
394:
390:
389:
388:
387:
384:
380:
376:
373:
368:
365:
362:
361:
360:
359:
355:
347:
343:
337:
334:
333:
332:
324:
322:
319:
318:
317:
309:
308:breast cancer
305:
301:
297:
294:
290:
286:
279:
275:
271:
268:
264:
260:
253:
249:
245:
243:
239:
235:
230:
227:
225:
221:
217:
216:
210:
207:
205:
202:
201:
196:
192:
188:
184:
181:
179:
174:
169:
165:
161:
157:
153:
149:
146:
145:
144:
143:
139:
135:
130:
126:
118:
113:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
745:
742:
722:
681:
680:
674:
670:
653:
649:
640:last week).
635:
627:
606:
599:
581:WhatamIdoing
555:
542:WhatamIdoing
536:
514:
504:
496:
494:
490:
476:
465:
444:
397:
396:
363:
350:
327:
326:
312:
311:
299:
298:
273:
247:
228:
213:
208:
198:
182:
147:
122:
45:
43:
31:
28:
634:(including
600:Rename to
160:WP:FRINGEy
637:USA Today
304:WP:FRINGE
285:• Gene93k
259:• Gene93k
187:WP:FRINGE
642:WP:UNDUE
557:MastCell
520:WP:UNDUE
497:Linguist
479:(toccyx)
453:23skidoo
200:MastCell
168:Zetawoof
117:View log
708:Mattnad
567:Juzhong
537:Comment
524:JoshuaZ
426:Mattnad
375:Juzhong
234:Mattnad
84:protect
79:history
50:John254
671:Rename
658:B.Wind
300:Delete
209:Delete
193:, the
112:delete
88:delete
698:: -->
505:Large
414:: -->
356:: -->
344:: -->
115:) – (
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
732:T@lk
712:talk
689:<
684:G716
662:talk
619:talk
585:talk
571:talk
546:talk
528:talk
515:keep
491:Keep
466:Keep
457:talk
445:Keep
430:talk
405:<
400:G716
379:talk
364:Keep
335:<
330:G716
320:<
315:G716
289:talk
274:Note
263:talk
248:Note
238:talk
229:Keep
220:talk
183:Keep
154:has
148:Keep
138:talk
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
46:keep
727:JFW
673:to
310:. —
283:--
280:.
257:--
254:.
215:DGG
729:|
714:)
664:)
656:.
652:-
621:)
587:)
573:)
548:)
530:)
501:At
459:)
432:)
381:)
291:)
265:)
240:)
222:)
140:)
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
48:.
723:K
710:(
695:C
692:·
660:(
617:(
583:(
569:(
544:(
526:(
455:(
428:(
411:C
408:·
395:—
377:(
353:C
341:C
338:·
323:·
287:(
261:(
236:(
218:(
175:)
173:ζ
171:(
136:(
119:)
109:(
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.