Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homostatic graft

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 merge to Allotransplantation#Other transplant options. Or elsewhere, but what discussion there is agrees that this shouldn't be a standalone article. Sandstein 09:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Homostatic graft

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

Looks like a simple, uncommon definition to me, with little chance of expansion. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 12:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:A5. The article has already been transwikied to wiktionary. —Noiratsi (talk) 14:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Google Scholar search proves that the term is valid - but aside from the definition there doesn't seem to be anything more to say. --MelanieN (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. What more could be added to the page? Reads more like a dictionary rather than an encyclopedia. Meatsgains (talk) 19:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

merge to Allotransplantation It seems a commonly enough used term and there is an obvious target. Mangoe (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Allotransplantation#Other transplant options. The term exists in reliable sources and seems a reasonable search term. Per WP:PRESERVE, preservation of verifiable content, in this case just the definition, is preferable to deletion. Allotransplantation is the best target I found as well. --Mark viking (talk) 04:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 02:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 07:22, 22 December 2013 (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.