Renovator

Proposed deletion of IBS Treatment Center

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article IBS Treatment Center, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Thingg^⊕⊗ 23:23, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of IBS Treatment Center

I have nominated IBS Treatment Center, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IBS Treatment Center. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

IBS

Hi,

Although irritable bowel syndrome could be regarded merely as a syndrome, I think it is recognised as a real entity (more specifically, a functional bowel disorder), and as such I wouldn't call something IBS if it is for example celiac disease presenting as IBS. I partially reverted your changes although they were clearly well intended. I'm always open to discussion.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Dear Renovator,

1. regarding the deletion of the IBS Treatment Center, I'd like to point out that conflict of interest is one warning sign of possible non-notability. Third-party sources can clearly demonstrate the notability of the Mayo Clinic. In this case, I have invited other users to comment because there are indeed various ideas about how strict notability should be defined (from 'do no harm' to 'delete unless blatantly obvious'). Furthermore, information such as from how far patients come to a clinic should be properly sourced and sounds to me as promotional.

2. You're right at pointing this out, but you also seem to be overly occupied with this point of view: you don't seem to agree with the mainstream conception, since you say that "Unfortunately the ROME III paper recommends against additional testing". Of course we know that some patients probably have food allergies, it's just not useful to start on an exclusion crusade with every patient, although I would check transglutaminase antibodies in any patient presenting with IBS. I just think your addition to the intro gave Undue weight to a single pitfall in IBS. Most of the controversy you signaled surrounding the role of food allergies, gut flora etc. is discussed further down in the article. I believe it is a 'real entity' in that some patients may have gut-brain axis abnormalities that can't be detected with standard clinical testing. There is convincing evidence and consensus for this theory. I agree that at some point in the article, we should mention that IBS is just a syndrome (=group of symptoms) and that there may be test abnormalities and treatable conditions underlying it, but in the majority of patients, detectable causes are excluded and treatment needs to be pragmatic, centered around a theory of gut-brain interaction. In the end I feel that we share many views on this, we just look at it from a different angle.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:38, 28 June 2008 (UTC)