Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiSurgery

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 merge to International Journal of Surgery. It's clear there's no consensus to keep the article here; since there do appear to be sources available (which even one of the delete !voters noted), this content can be moved to another article. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:32, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiSurgery

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:WEB JFW | T@lk 19:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Great idea, I like it. Unfortunately, there's only a brief "Hello" over on Pubmed, and the wiki's own About page for resources. This comes nowhere near being notable as a web page. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the owners International Journal of Surgery. All that I can find for significant coverage is this. Joe Chill (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's also PMID 19126604, but it's just a letter from MH Edwards. Google scholar shows a number of articles that name it, but none that seem to properly discuss it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant delete. I wondered about the article's notability and I added a reliable source prior to tagging by JFW. Unfortunately I'm struggling to find more sources. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Here are a couple books that mention it http://books.google.com/books?q=Wikisurgery&btnG=Search+Books It is significant enough to be added under the International Journal of Surgery with a redirect. By the way Wikipedia only gets 42 hits over at pubmed. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (and keep Redirect) I'm more inclined to keeping information on the encyclopedia (you could say that I'm a mild inclusionist). After thinking about it though, I think it is notable enough to keep but not enough so that it deserves it's own article. Thanks for telling me, Axl. Airplaneman ^talk 20:05, 7 October 2009 (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.