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 old trope of doctors bad handwriting is, well, a trope. It's not encyclopedic and rarely are stereotypes notable outside of a historic context.
Praxidicae (
talk) 16:05, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge into
Medical_prescription#Legibility which is actually quite an important issue. See
TIME which explains that this killed about 7,000 people each year in the US.
Andrew🐉(
talk) 16:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I looked at that source but could not find the citation to the actual report, can someone post a link to the report?
Erkin AlpGüney 19:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge Seconded the merger into
Medical_prescription#Legibility as Andrew stated that this is an important issue and I think the article in question could benefit from this article should it be merged with it.
Pahiy (
talk) 16:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Preserve. There would be no serious academic studies in doctor handwriting, if bad doctor handwriting were just a stereotypic problem. I see you have not read the cited references thoroughly. I have also addressed the opposing sources in a section in the article.
Erkin AlpGüney 17:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Here, a supposedly Russian-speaking doctor fills the patient's record book by writing "iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii"... into the diagnosis field.
Erkin AlpGüney 17:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Yeah, we don't rely on anything reddit has to say.
Praxidicae (
talk) 18:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I linked to an image as an example, not the discussion as a proof.
Erkin AlpGüney 18:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge to
Medical_prescription#Legibility. Per nomination, I agree that this is a “trope” and not necessarily worthy of its own article. However, it does deserve some coverage being a well-known trope, and it easily has a place at
Medical_prescription#Legibility as others have suggested. Since the article is brief, this could easily be accomplished without sacrificing too much content. Woerich(talk) 14:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The citation I have added in the last edit shows that this is not the case, telling that it is intentionally unreadable.
Erkin AlpGüney 14:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Not limited to prescriptions. See post of mine above.
Erkin AlpGüney 13:49, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge as per above. No need for a standalone article when it can be fully covered within an existing article.
Natureium (
talk) 14:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge as per above. Certainly a valid search term as a cultural phenom. Already covered at redirect target. If a merge is needed, please ping me. (gratuitous comment. EMR's have eliminated this problem where they are used.) --Deep fried okraUser talk:Deepfriedokra 16:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Struck duplicate, you don't get to vote twice...revise your original.
Reywas92Talk 19:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Not a vote "the deletion process is a discussion and not a vote", says the guide.
Erkin AlpGüney 08:57, 18 April 2020 (UTC)reply
In addition, discussion entries are not meant to be edited. Undone the strikethrough for you. 08:59, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
"Do not make conflicting recommendations; if you change your mind, modify your original recommendation rather than adding a new one. The recommended way of doing this is to use strike-through by enclosing a retracted statement between and after the *, as in "• Delete Keep"." "You can explain your earlier recommendation in response to others but do not repeat a bolded recommendation on a new bulleted line." You are being disruptive.
Reywas92Talk 18:00, 18 April 2020 (UTC)reply
I don’t think
Erkin Alp is being disruptive. That comment comes across as needlessly aggressive. Woerich(talk) 01:33, 19 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Merge per above, does not necessitate a separate page, can be covered there.
Reywas92Talk 19:52, 17 April 2020 (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.