Talk:Systemic vasculitis

Requested move 27 November 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Technical move requested. (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 10:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

Necrotizing vasculitis → Systemic vasculitis – I propose back to the title "systemic vasculitis". This title, between 2007 and 2017, this is by far the more common name and, per the principle of least astonishment, we should be using this as our article title. Tom (LT) (talk) 04:14, 27 November 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Andrewa (talk) 05:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

This would revert the move

03:38, 26 October 2017‎ DHeyward talk contribs block‎ 53 bytes +53‎ DHeyward moved page Systemic vasculitis to Necrotizing vasculitis over redirect: ICD 10 and NIH common name

which presumably refers to ICD-10 and National Institutes of Health usage.

Unfortunately DHeyward appears to be inactive. But what is the justification for saying the proposed name is the more common name? Andrewa (talk) 05:13, 4 December 2020 (UTC) [reply ]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

redirected Systemic vasculitides to Systemic vasculitis

Merge proposal

I propose merging Necrotizing arteriolitis into Systemic vasculitis. The definition of Necrotizing arteriolitis is incosistent throughout publications and seems to mostly be a historic term (see Talk:Necrotizing arteriolitis#Some questions). The only difference between the terms is that Necrotizing arteriolitis refers to just the arteries while systemic vasculitis encompasses all vessel sizes. The current classification system for vasculitis doesn't use the term Necrotizing arteriolitis [1]. Necrotizing arteriolitis fits criteria 1 and 2 of WP:MERGEREASON. Intentionally Dense ^(Contribs) 19:01, 24 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

You say that the current classification does not use it, which is completely right, but the source [2] does in fact use the term Necrotizing arteritis, which currently is a redirect to Necrotizing arteriolitis. It may be better to move to Necrotizing arteritis. The source of both is the same: this one It describes Necrotizing arteritis as a symptom of Polyarteritis nodosa and Microscopic polyangitis.

About WP:MERGEREASON 1, it it is not one of "two or more pages on exactly the same subject". It is definetly not a duplicate of this article or any other article, really. It does not overlap with any article, and it doesn't comply with WP:REDUNDANTFORK or WP:REDUNDANT

I propose to move to Necrotizing arteritis per these sources: [3] [4] Earth605 (talk) 13:46, 26 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Sorry I didn't realize the wording for merge criteria 1 included exactly the same scope, that is my mistake. By pointing out that the current classification doesn't use the term, I meant they do not use it as a diagnoses which I should have clarified.

However I do have to disagree with you on the overlap part as it does overlap with Vasculitis and most of the medium vessel vasculitides. As you mentioned above NA is mostly described as a traits of other disorders, not as a stand alone diagnosis. Intentionally Dense ^(Contribs) 04:09, 28 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

So should we change the scope of the article? I mean, fever, cough, abdominal pain and more, do have pages. Earth605 (talk) 12:19, 29 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

That would be better however I don't really think it meets WP:GNG after going through the sources. I was only really able to identify one secondary source (the Modern Surgery pathology source) that went into depth on the topic. The other sources include only trivial mentions or are primary sources and therefore do not establish any notability. But I also would prefer to give you the chance to have this be merged instead of taking this to AfD and having someone suggest a merge there. Intentionally Dense ^(Contribs) 14:00, 29 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Well, in medical pages, is there something such as primary sources? Earth605 (talk) 14:06, 29 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Yes, have you read WP:MEDRS? If you haven't I'd suggest reading through the entire page but the most relevant sections regarding this are WP:MEDASSESS, WP:MEDDATE and WP:MEDRS#Avoid primary sources. Many of the cited sources for the page on necrotizing arteritis don't mention the term in relation to what is written on the Wikipedia page or are primary sources. I added some tags to the page to emphasize this as well if you would like me to break down my reasoning further I absolutely can. Intentionally Dense ^(Contribs) 17:15, 29 August 2025 (UTC) [reply ]