Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Integration disorder
- 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. The article's subject is found to lack sufficient notability to distinguish it from its related disorder, schizophrenia. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 03:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Integration disorder
The topic is completely redundant with "schizophrenia", where the name change is already discussed. These two subjects are the same thing, just renamed in Japanese for political correctness (and increased accuracy). The Japanese page for 精神分裂病 (=schizophrenia) is simply a redirect to 統合失調症 (="integration disorder"). The Japanese article says: "日本では2002年まで、精神分裂病（せいしんぶんれつびょう）と呼ばれていた。", meaning, "In Japan, it was known as 'schizophrenia' until 2002." Promiment Japanese-English dictionaries (
EIJIRO) still provide "schizophrenia" as a translation for 統合失調症. Since the name change is already discussed on the English Wikipedia article for schizophrenia, this article serves no purpose; it is redundant. If Japanese Wikipedia doesn't need two articles for it, neither do we. The name change is also discussed on the social construction of schizophrenia page. Bueller 007 (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
]
- Delete as the nominator says, the English article on schizophrenia already covers details of the name change. "Integration disorder" is a literal translation of the kanji characters which make up the current name, but that is not a reason for having a separate article on the same disorder. It has averaged about 13 page views a day over the last three months. Is that enough to warrant a redirect? AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, so long as the article for schizophrenia includes some of this article's content. 8bitW (talk) 17:13, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete perhaps as I, at first, thought this was a keepable article but there are now questionable signs of the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 05:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete ]
- 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.