Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery

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. Several people suggested a merge, but I found nothing worth merging; the proposed curriculum is still in the testing stages and does not actually exist yet. --MelanieN (talk) 16:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery

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

Maybe belongs at Wikiversity. Not seeing enough independent sources. Should be merged to robotic surgery / deleted. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete not an encyclopedia article but rather some kind of curriculum. I thought about speedying this. Jytdog (talk) 22:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 22:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not an encyclopaedic article, and not a topic I'd expect to see in an encyclopaedia. Robotic surgery is clearly a topic meriting coverage, and (given sufficient coverage in third-party sources) the teaching of robotic surgery might well be - but an article on a curriculum for the teaching of robotic surgery? Surely not. Wikipedia is not a web-hosting service... AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article actually appears to be about a proposed certification program in robotic surgery, which apparently does not yet exist. In the same manner that one can become certified as a thoracic surgeon or as an orthopedic surgeon through specialized training post medical school, one should be able to become certified to perform robot-assisted surgery. That being said, the article doesn't need to exist, and the existence of a certification program can be mentioned in robot-assisted surgery should such a certification program ever actually be launched. Since no such course has yet been launched, I have to go with delete. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 00:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Curriculum article of unclear notability, unencyclopedic as written, lacking independent references with the possible exception of the Tanaka paper. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage of this program/curriculum. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Also WP:CRYSTAL issues, as this is curriculum is still in testing, per article's Validation Trials section.Dialectric (talk) 07:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. There is some interesting information in this article. If I were getting this type of surgery, as a reader this might be useful to find out about some of the training that a physician receives. Merge with robot-assisted surgery.

Bfpage |leave a message 10:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Unfortunately, there is no indication that any significant number of practitioners of robot-assisted surgery have received the training described by this article. It is a proposed curriculum that is presently undergoing validation. It may turn out in the end that the powers that be find that this course is not effective and don't adapt it at all. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

merge any text that is useful from article with robot-assisted surgery.--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:38, 25 June 2015 (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.