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 Delete as WP:OR. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of Functional Disorders

[edit]

Admitted to be a student assignment. Is it original research? We don't even recognise the term functional disorder. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A student assignment can also be to research a subject. I don't see any original research in the article, it's got plenty of references. ChessCreator (talk) 04:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep per [1]. Give the article some time. If there is no improvement, then bring it back for AfD. DigitalC (talk) 04:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and possibly Redirect(Move) to Functional disorders as that would be suitable name. Sub-heading, 'Evolution of Functional disorders' ChessCreator (talk) 04:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep and move to Functional disorder. This reads like a term paper rather than an encyclopedic article, but it seems that the topic is a worthy one, we don't have an article on it, and what this needs chiefly is to have its text re-worked. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the author going with this? Heck if I can tell. WillOakland (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete the article at present has not yet gotten around to talking about the claimed subject. We probably could use an article on "functional disorder" but this would not be a significant start to it. DGG (talk) 02:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Give the article some time . If there is no improvement, then bring it back for AfD. --@ the $un$hine . (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
regretfully - Pretty Strong Delete - the article is OR. Yes there are such things as functional disorders. Yes there is a fight/flight response. But AFAIK the two are brought together under an unusual heading which strongly suggests an original synthesis of the two ideas into something like what the heading is. Unfortunately, this needs some source encapsulating the whole idea. I am tempted to speedy the whole article as OR but will place a note on the talk page. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep How can you say an article is original research when it's so well referenced, in fact it appears only three sentence don't have a specific reference. If those three sentences are a problem remove them. Otherwise make it clear why this is original research because right now it's not as all clear to me. SunCreator (talk) 13:14, 14 April 2008 (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.