549:. Because it has been reported in the laypress, "hair brushing syndrome", although bogus, comes up on google, so we can do our readers a service by providing the redirect to the more medically accurate article. The content is already there-- no merge needed-- I believe the objections mentioned above to a redirect can be dealt with. My second alternative would be delete.
389:
to hair grooming syncope, although there's a paragraph about it there already. Blue lips and loss of consciousness indicate lack of blood supply, characteristic of syncope, and the girl was probably stressed out starting a new year. The sources are all unreliable sensational tabloids that covered the
255:
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
525:
per
Alexrexpvt's original arguments - unreliable sourcing, no evidence that it is a real medical syndrome, no evidence of anything really beyond the tendency of sections of the media to filch each other's stories - and as has been pointed out, including this in Hair-grooming syncope would appear to
441:
to hair grooming syncope. I am not in any way qualified to determine whether or not the unfortunate girl actually suffered from the syncope, but in the absence of medical sources providing evidence for the existence of the syndrome a carefully worded merge seems like the best solution. At first I
259:
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 Knowledge, because readers
317:
has possibly reinterviewed the girl's parents, but it's not clear: in that case there's two unreliable sources instead of one). It's also worth pointing out that the anonymous doctors aren't cited directly: the whole thing is based on an interview with the girl's
502:, hence it should be deleted. I think the article's author simply wasn't aware of the requirements for medically-related content. Mainstream media coverage is basically irrelevant to the question of verifiability when it comes to medical conditions. --
293:
Tabloids aren't reliable sources for establishing the existence of rare conditions. They also can't be used to establish the existence or notability of a pseudoscientific phenomenon when they make no claim that the phenomenon is pseudoscientific. The
256:"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.
321:
Unless someone can find reliable sources that identify this as either a persistent pseudoscientific phenomenon (rather than dubious speculation about a single case) or an actual medical condition the article should be deleted.
168:
471:
To those voting merge: merging to hair-grooming syncope doesn't really make sense unless/until that is found to be the explanation - at the moment, it's one of three possibilities presented in sources.
342:. If the consensus ultimately leans towards preserving the content, it might better to add a section on "hair grooming syncope", which has appeared in various scholarly journals, to the
200:
579:. I'm not saying Merge because it shouldn't be given undue weight (maybe not even mentioned) in the syncope article unless a reliable medical source notes this as a special case.
249:
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
162:
260:
could potentially come to
Knowledge to find out about the "syndrome". The article needs to be re-written to avoid any implication that the "syndrome" is medically validated.
121:
302:
might apply here, especially since this seems to be a fairly routine piece of sensationalist reporting over what is ultimately a single event, a young girl's illness.
620:
596:
305:
All of the references given in the article (and every mention of the subject I've been able to find elsewhere) seem to be based on a single article in the
94:
89:
128:
309:
tabloid: given that rewrites are not independent of one another, there's essentially one source, which doesn't satisfy the "sources" criterion of the
98:
81:
225:
as article author. Obviously the sourcing to take this article to GA or above is insufficient, but media coverage is more than enough to meet
183:
150:
457:
17:
298:
article mentions that someone on
Gizmodo suggested this could be a case of hair-grooming syncope, but that's not enough.
144:
636:
612:
587:
561:
535:
511:
481:
462:
429:
407:
377:
355:
331:
273:
238:
216:
85:
63:
229:. I've tried to write the article to avoid being misleading ; others are of course welcome to improve on my efforts.
140:
654:
40:
390:
story three years after it broke. The fact that 17 months later, no major sources have covered it suggests that
190:
624:
600:
557:
531:
77:
69:
650:
576:
546:
365:
51:
36:
368:. I didn't see that page till Rutebega pointed it out. The subject's already adequately covered there.
203:, the topic of the article is not clearly notable, and the sources are both self-referential and fail
477:
452:
425:
373:
351:
346:
article, and then include a very brief reference to "hair brushing syndrome" as an alternative name.
327:
234:
156:
584:
299:
176:
498:. Rather, this article under discussion is about a medical condition for which there is not one
401:
343:
550:
527:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
649:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
507:
499:
473:
447:
421:
369:
347:
323:
230:
212:
204:
580:
443:
395:
310:
285:
271:
252:
226:
495:
417:
57:
115:
207:. Lacking proper sources, this topic is highly dubious and possibly misleading.
503:
208:
261:
643:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
442:
wondered if it might be another manifestation of the dreaded
288:(including the notes) here are "reliable" and "multiple".
251:" is false. It should say "Hair-brushing syndrome is a
111:
107:
103:
175:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
657:). No further edits should be made to this page.
494:I agree that merging would be inappropriate, as
416:Unfortunately that explanation would constitute
392:it probably isn't notable enough for an article
621:list of Scotland-related deletion discussions
597:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
189:
8:
619:Note: This debate has been included in the
595:Note: This debate has been included in the
618:
594:
575:. I don't object to redirecting it to
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
247:. The introductory sentence "
637:18:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
613:18:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
588:19:45, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
562:18:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
536:02:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
512:23:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
482:23:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
463:20:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
430:23:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
408:19:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
378:19:56, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
356:17:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
332:15:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
274:14:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
239:13:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
217:13:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
64:00:08, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
674:
646:Please do not modify it.
500:suitable reliable source
284:. The relevant parts of
32:Please do not modify it.
78:Hair-brushing syndrome
70:Hair-brushing syndrome
577:hair-grooming syncope
547:Hair-grooming syncope
366:Hair-grooming syncope
52:Hair-grooming syncope
344:Vasovagal response
48:The result was
639:
615:
418:original research
665:
648:
633:
630:
627:
609:
606:
603:
554:
460:
455:
450:
404:
398:
270:
266:
253:pseudoscientific
194:
193:
179:
131:
119:
101:
60:
34:
673:
672:
668:
667:
666:
664:
663:
662:
661:
655:deletion review
644:
631:
628:
625:
607:
604:
601:
552:
458:
453:
448:
402:
396:
268:
262:
136:
127:
92:
76:
73:
58:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
671:
669:
660:
659:
640:
616:
591:
590:
565:
564:
539:
538:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
487:
486:
485:
484:
466:
465:
444:Glasgow effect
435:
434:
433:
432:
411:
410:
383:
382:
381:
380:
335:
334:
319:
303:
290:
289:
242:
241:
197:
196:
133:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
670:
658:
656:
652:
647:
641:
638:
634:
622:
617:
614:
610:
598:
593:
592:
589:
586:
582:
578:
574:
570:
567:
566:
563:
559:
555:
548:
544:
541:
540:
537:
533:
529:
524:
521:
520:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
483:
479:
475:
470:
469:
468:
467:
464:
461:
456:
451:
445:
440:
437:
436:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
413:
412:
409:
405:
399:
393:
388:
385:
384:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
360:
359:
358:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
337:
336:
333:
329:
325:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
301:
297:
292:
291:
287:
283:
282:
278:
277:
276:
275:
272:
267:
265:
257:
254:
250:
246:
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
221:
220:
219:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
199:As discussed
192:
188:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:Find sources:
134:
130:
126:
123:
117:
113:
109:
105:
100:
96:
91:
87:
83:
79:
75:
74:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
61:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
645:
642:
632:PEANUTBUTTER
608:PEANUTBUTTER
572:
568:
542:
528:AndyTheGrump
522:
438:
391:
386:
361:
340:Afterthought
339:
338:
314:
307:Daily Record
306:
300:WP:SENSATION
295:
280:
279:
263:
258:
248:
244:
243:
222:
198:
186:
180:
172:
165:
159:
153:
147:
137:
124:
56:
50:redirect to
49:
47:
31:
28:
163:free images
526:be WP:OR.
474:Nikkimaria
422:Nikkimaria
370:Alexrexpvt
348:Alexrexpvt
324:Alexrexpvt
315:Daily Mail
231:Nikkimaria
651:talk page
581:Superm401
296:Huff Post
245:Weak keep
37:talk page
653:or in a
573:Redirect
543:Redirect
397:Rutebega
362:Redirect
318:parents.
205:WP:MEDRS
122:View log
39:or in a
553:Georgia
313:. (The
169:WP refs
157:scholar
95:protect
90:history
59:MBisanz
569:Delete
523:Delete
311:WP:GNG
286:WP:GNG
281:Delete
227:WP:GNG
141:Google
99:delete
623:. ★☆
599:. ★☆
551:Sandy
504:Scray
496:WP:OR
439:Merge
387:Merge
209:Scray
184:JSTOR
145:books
129:Stats
116:views
108:watch
104:links
16:<
626:DUCK
602:DUCK
585:Talk
558:Talk
532:talk
508:talk
478:talk
426:talk
403:talk
374:talk
352:talk
328:talk
235:talk
223:Keep
213:talk
201:here
177:FENS
151:news
112:logs
86:talk
82:edit
635:☆★
611:☆★
571:or
545:to
459:Dui
454:Mac
449:Ben
394:. —
364:to
264:Axl
191:TWL
120:– (
629:IS
605:IS
583:-
560:)
534:)
510:)
480:)
446:.
428:)
420:.
406:)
376:)
354:)
330:)
237:)
215:)
171:)
114:|
110:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
55:.
556:(
530:(
506:(
476:(
424:(
400:(
372:(
350:(
326:(
269:¤
233:(
211:(
195:)
187:·
181:·
173:·
166:·
160:·
154:·
148:·
143:(
135:(
132:)
125:·
118:)
80:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.