Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triad Of Malignancy

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 16:08, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Triad Of Malignancy

Miserably fails the Google test, sounds more like an urban legend, frankly. Delete. JFW | T@lk 22:53, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Search "Triad Of Malignancy" and it will pull up CT Triad of Malignancy. CT Scans. Weak keep for finding something on it. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:59, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

CT Scans? UT. delete--NewAtair Δ 23:01, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Change my vote to delete, because after thorough reading, I see how it does not relate. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:41, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. This content, as is, most certainly does not relate to CT scans. Even Googling parts of it fails to find anything valid within the terms of this article. Looks like a rather sick prank to me.

Note that this article was quickly "decorated" with a cartoon illustration by User:Freddiekruger, which is a new account whose only edits were on this article, and followed up the work of the anonymous IP that created this article. I have suspicions that they might be the same person: we should watch these accounts for vandalism. -- Karada 23:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Being quite familiar with Ben Taub General Hospital, I wouldn't at all be surprised if this term were used there or even if it originated there, since that by the time most tumors are seen at "the Tub," they're far advanced enough to be easily seen and smelled. Still, without any historical documentation of the fact that this term originated there, this article is not verifiable and isn't encyclopedic. It's nothing more than a dict.def. We could move it to Wiktionary. —Brim 01:44, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm a fourth-year medical student; I've never heard of this, although I'm sure there is a lot I haven't heard of. I have no idea if people use this term (probably informally) at Ben Taub or not, but in any case I believe it is unencyclopedic. Unless there is some evidence that using this distinction provides a better characterization of prognosis or treatment options than the currently used TNM classifications and so on, it does not belong in an encyclopedia. It sounds like an in-house joke. — Knowledge Seeker দ (talk) 03:31, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• The artilce does a poor job of explaining it, but there is a triad of symptoms detectable by CT scan that is associated with malignant meningioma (one type of cancer). It has been used to demonstrate the cancer in something like 5 cases, and really is too specific a topic to be in an encyclopedia, delete--nixie 01:45, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.