Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autoeponym

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 List of eponymously named diseases. Stifle (talk) 15:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Autoeponym

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

Not a notable word/concept; WP:ONESOURCE issues (effectively). Alexbrn ^{talk|contribs|COI} 18:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge relevant content into List of eponymously named diseases etc; the concept of "autoeponym" is original coinage and essentially fails WP:V. Schamroth's sign/Leo Schamroth is not listed (and should have been). JFW | T@lk 19:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
H. W. Fowler I think calls them "nonce words" i.e. words that are only ever used once and essentially made up on the spot. Not that it matters but I have had that in the back of my head for days now trying to remember what they are called.... 23:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonTrew (talk • contribs)

Merge per Jfdwolff, WP:ONESOURCE per nom. The second sentence of the lede makes nonsense of the first, since it states that the possessive form should be used in cases where the nominee is the patient and not the doctor, which by definition is not "autoeponymous", and the specific example (Lou Gehrig's disease) was not so named by him. Si Trew (talk) 23:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2014 (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.