Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wireless capsule endoscopy

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 Miniature Ingestible Capsule and redirect Wireless capsule endoscopy to capsule endoscopy; any content that has merit may be merged from the history. Sandstein 21:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wireless capsule endoscopy

There are three articles on Capsule Endoscopy that this author has created. It has been shown that the author has a conflict of interest and is the father of a capsule endoscope inventor. The author has also admitted to plagiarism, which he subsequently deleted on the Talk page. I suggest that out of the three articles, Capsule Endoscopy be left and the other two deleted, as the term itself is what is generally used in medical literature. Cyborg Ninja 04:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for copyvio per nom. --Blind Eagle^{talk~contribs} 16:35, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In rereading the article, I still see references to Click on Image which must have been copy-and-pasted from another website. --Blind Eagle^{talk~contribs} 17:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The person objecting does not have the facts right.Three different persons created the articles on Wireless Capsule endoscopy,Miniature Ingestible Capsule and Capsule Endoscopy.

As stated earlier,Europeans have named it Wireless Capsule endoscopy.This is perhaps the oldest writeup in wikipedia.Then came Miniature Ingestible Capsule after the invention/patent were issued that encampass Endoscopy/Colonoscopy and other uses.There are a few patents patents for different applications.

Then someone wrote another wikipedia on Capsule endoscopy--a term now used by professional doctors/researchers in the US.Japanese inventors/developers are using this title also as evident from Olympus patent and Sayaka Capsule.

Because this technology is evolving for different applications--it is better to leave all three articles without prejudging--as Wikipedia searchers could search for different KEYWORDS.

Let the Courts or judges or scientific community decide which is the broadest title.US Gastroentrologists are drifting to "Capsule Endoscopy",but others are using Wireless or Ingestible Capsule.DO NOT BE IN HASTE!!!!

As far as CLEANUP--IT is worth doing--without destroying any information that may be good information for Wikipedia readers.

All these articles are presenting facts about inventions,developments and the future of this very exciting developments.Anyone opposing should be mindful that these article give many facts unavailable to a large community of readers who may want know what is going on in this area.Obviously Given Imaging and Olympus Corp. have their own publicity articles which are biased--but none of them mentions of other developments or legal cases.These Wikipedia articles gives reference to Given,Olympus,Sayaka articles in addition to all patents,major research papers and patents .Wikipedia source has everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SatinderMullick (talk • contribs) 22:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone changed the writeup for CAPSULE ENDOSCOPY on Oct.4th,2007--and excluded all the references except SAYAKA new CAPSULE.THAT IS UNFAIR writeup.Sayaka is a great Capsule but so are EndoCapsule by Olympus and PillCam by Given.ALL the information about this technology and developers should be INCLUDED.

PLEASE REFRAIN from DELETING COMPLETE INFORMATION in fairness for millions of users.

Wikipedia is an important source for different users .So please do not delete references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SatinderMullick (talk • contribs) 22:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I strongly disagree with you, SatinderMullick. You have several things wrong. I'll start with the naming conventions. First off, the only difference between "wireless capsule endoscopy" and "capsule endoscopy" is the word "wireless," which is unnecessary and arbitrary. Because it's a fairly new technology, some people are just as inclined to call it "portable," "wireless," what have you -- but the fact stands that "capsule endoscopy" is most-often used and indicative of what the device itself is. "Ingestible capsule" is rather silly considering I could call just about any capsule medication and "ingestible capsule." On top of this all, the user whose credibility I was referring to was YOU, SatinderMullick. Several users have warned you about your contributions, lack of citations, poor writing and plagiarism (to which you yourself admitted on Talk:Wireless_capsule_endoscopy and subsequently deleted the page]]. Also, I was the one who edited Capsule Endoscopy (apparently it has to be capitalized) because of the lack of citations and serious advertising going on. Your poor writing was barely decipherable and I salvaged what I could. After researching your history, it is evident that not only do you have an agenda which you admitted to, but that you have a conflict of interest which I mentioned at the top here. I'll do more research into whether or not the "wireless capsule endoscopy" article should be kept or "capsule endoscopy," but since all three articles refer to the same thing, two of them have to go/redirect to one page. - Cyborg Ninja 00:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More information about major author of articles: [[1]] This is his old user page, before he blanked it. An administrator should deal with this. - Cyborg Ninja 00:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Capsule Endoscopy. If this topic deserves a separate article, it needs a complete rewrite. The article should not be deleted, because it has substantial history -- it was a fairly good stub before it was re-written by User:SatinderMullick to promote his son's patent. utcursch | talk 04:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've followed your suggestion and merged significant parts of the old stub with the Capsule Endoscopy article. - Cyborg Ninja 04:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now that the article has already been merged, I'd suggest withdrawal of this AfD -- this article can be turned into a redirect, and AfD can be closed. I'll merge the history for GFDL compliance. utcursch | talk 04:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd like to know what will be done about User:SatinderMullick. I myself do not know much about redirecting articles, and I'd like to see what else is being considered first for a consensus. - Cyborg Ninja 07:56, 5 October 2007

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletions. —Espresso Addict 10:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC)(UTC)[reply]
Merge non-spammy content with redirect per Utcursch. Capsule Endoscopy should also probably be moved to capsule endoscopy. Espresso Addict 11:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with [[[Capsule endoscopy]], and don't be shy with cutting. Phasmatisnox 03:11, 8 October 2007 (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.