Wikipedia

Talk:Cold-stimulus headache/Archive 2

< Talk:Cold-stimulus headache
Latest comment: 5 years ago by TompaDompa in topic Suspected WP:HOAX
Archive 1Archive 2

Requested move 4 November 2017

Latest comment: 6 years ago49 comments19 people in discussion
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Cold-stimulus headache. There is clearly no agreement below to rename this article as proposed, and yet there is much discussion that the present title is not the correct name for this page, as well. There seems to be consensus to move this page to another proposed title, "Cold-stimulus headache", so that is hopefully correct. Be sure that if anyone objects to that new title, then according to the closing instructions, any editor can immediately request a page move to a different title. Happy Holidays to all! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  11:30, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Ice cream headache → Brain freeze – Per WP:COMMONNAME, Brain freeze is by far the most common name for this condition. Nobody I know refers to this as an ice cream headache. ANDROS1337TALK 23:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

@AjaxSmack:I am guessing you meant to write "Note" instead of "Not"? Thinker78 (talk) 04:49, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Oppose "Ice cream headache is caused by" returns only 13 results in Google [1], "cold-stimulus headache is caused by" doesn't return any results in Google [2], but "brain freeze is caused by" returns more than 50 results [3]. Thinker78 (talk) 04:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC) Edited 20:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC) Edited again 04:33, 14 November 2017 (UTC) Edit: See my first reply to Vanisaac several comments below for rationale of opposition. 01:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose "Brain freeze" is a misappellation, since the sensation doesn't originate in the brain, and nothing is being frozen. Per Google Ngram, "brain freeze" has had quite a recent jump in popularity, but "ice cream headache" (or "ice-cream") was more common up to about the year 2000. Plus, "brain freeze" just sounds peurile. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Obviously the most common name for this affliction, even if it is technically incorrect. I'll point out that the current name is also incorrect technically, since the affliction can be caused by any sufficient cold stimulus, not just ice-cream. We have other medical articles that are titled in non-literal and technically incorrect/incomplete ways, such as butterflies in the stomach and tennis elbow. The only other option would be to title it the scientific name ("swimmer's ear" being at Otitis externa, for example), but sphenopalatine ganglioneuralgia doesn't really roll off the tongue. -- Netoholic @ 12:24, 5 November 2017 (UTC) Added: Cold-stimulus headache is better than the current title though -- Netoholic @ 11:13, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
@Sangdeboeuf:It is called colloquialism. Same as when people say "I'm freezing" when they feel very cold, but rarely that would translate in the person actually freezing. And as you say, the popularity of the term is also there. The policy Wikipedia:Article titles says: "If the sources written after the change is announced routinely use the new name, Wikipedia should follow suit and change relevant titles to match."Wikipedia:Article_titles#Use_commonly_recognizable_names Thinker78 (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any "announced change" in the naming of this phenomenon. As for "colloquialism", WP should be written in a formal, not a colloquial, tone. See WP:TONE. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
The "announced change" refers to the requested move, the change of the name of the article. And I think it is within the scope of encyclopedias to also define colloquial terms. Thinker78 (talk) 08:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
No, WP:NAMECHANGES is about subjects whose names have changed in real life, such as 2003 UB313/Eris, not about article title changes. There is no official body responsible for naming the phenomenon on question, so that policy is not relevant here. Also, it's not Wikipedia's purpose to define terms; it is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Instead, we describe topics using commonly-recognizable names. In any event, "ice-cream headache" and "brain freeze" are both colloquial terms.

Per WP:COMMONNAME, "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources". As opposed to "brain freeze", the term "ice-cream headache" is at least partially accurate, since it describes a headache that often (not always) occurs while eating ice cream. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Sangdeboeuf But "announced change" refers to the change of the article name not that someone is announcing that a concept's favored term has changed in social, scientific ambits. I think that "brain freeze" is more accurate than "ice cream headache", because when I eat or drink something very cold I feel that my brain freezes but the resulting headache probably was not caused by ice cream because the most common way I get such a headache is by drinking a slurpee. Thinker78 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Incorrect; see WP:NAMECHANGES. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 19:58, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Both the current and proposed titles are colloquial, and the formal medical term is highly unrecognizable, so it makes sense simply to go with the more common one, which I agree is "brain freeze" (though not by a huge margin). I don't think there's much of a case to say that one is more or less accurate than the other; "ice-cream headache" seems unnecessarily narrow given that the phenomenon can occur when one quickly consumes anything cold (not just ice cream). ╠╣uw [talk] 19:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Move to Cold-stimulus headache – that is the term which is well-atested in actual, y'know, medical literature, which is supposed to be our guidance See the GBook search, and it also has a virtue of being intuitive for the layman. By contrast, "brain freeze" is less used, [4] and mostly mentioned as a colloquial synonym. While I'm not a priori against colloquial titles, they should be avoided when a reasonable formal alternative exists (feces, not "shit".) No such user (talk) 10:19, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
    @No such user: I don't think I would support your suggestion. 1.I never heard of the term, 2.That is a technical term that probably is mostly used in some circles and not in the broader society, 3. "cold-stimulus headache is caused by" doesn't return any results in Google [5] as opposed to "brain freeze is caused by" which returns more than 50 results [6]. Btw, what is your position in the actual topic at hand, which is the current requested move? Thinker78 (talk) 20:48, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
@Thinker78: Look, I've never heard of this type of headache before this disussion, so I haven't encountered either term. I guess that is a plus, because I don't come with any cognitive bias. I don't have a preference for either of the proposed titles, and quick research shows that both are in circulation in RS. From your own search link above, Scientific American, Health.Harvard.Edu, ABC Australia, Mayo Clinic all use "Ice cream headache" in the title, with "brain freeze" and "cold stimulus headache" mentioned as synonyms in text. Yes, there are others, such as CNN Health, that use only the latter two. I don't think it's easy to establish which one is more prevalent, and people are prone to WP:IDONTKNOWIT reasoning for selecting one. However, those are kind of magazine, popular health, Q&A sources, and our register is supposed to be a tad more formal than that; they all acknowledge that it's Officially known as cold stimulus headaches (from Mayo). Thus my proposal to go for the "official", formal one. Granted, selection of more vs. les formal term is a question of good measure – I wouldn't support "lateral epicondylitis" over "tennis elbow", but "cold-stimulus headache" looks eminently reasonable, in the absence of a single universally-known colloquial name. No such user (talk) 11:44, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I think we should focus on the task at hand which is whether support or oppose the current move. After this is sorted out you guys can request a move per your suggestion. Thinker78 (talk) 07:14, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Supposedly, this is a discussion and not a vote. The issue at hand is the best title for the article. If you or the closer don't agree, feel free to ignore my comments. —  AjaxSmack  01:01, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
You are right, it is a discussion. But I feel discussing another name is kind of going in a tangent. Thinker78 (talk) 06:04, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
@Amakuru:"cold-stimulus headache is caused by" doesn't return any results in Google [10] as opposed to "brain freeze is caused by" which returns more than 50 results [11], so actually "cold-stimulus headache" fails WP:RECOGNIZE. WP:Article titles, under "Disambiguation", states that "If the article is about the primary topic to which the ambiguous name refers, then that name can be its title without modification". Thinker78 (talk) 03:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@In ictu oculi: "cold-stimulus headache is caused by" doesn't return any results in Google [12] as opposed to "brain freeze is caused by" which returns more than 50 results [13]. And what do you mean with "per serious WP:RS"? As I said, if I search "cold-stimulus headache is caused by", I don't find any results, but there are results with "brain freeze is caused by", including reliable sources [1] [2] [3] which determine that the term is neither ambiguous nor inaccurate, or else it wouldn't be used by those sources.@Sangdeboeuf: Thinker78 (talk) 04:17, 14 November 2017 (UTC) Edited 04:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC) Edit: I correct myself, the term is actually ambiguous. 02:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://books.google.com.gt/books?id=8DlS0gfO_QUC&pg=PT54&lpg=PT54&dq=%22brain+freeze+is+caused+by%22&source=bl&ots=pMDyX1HwIr&sig=sbe6Z5syaG3xbIBmwsRSFwUtrDc&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22brain%20freeze%20is%20caused%20by%22&f=false
  2. ^ https://cosmosmagazine.com/biology/science-behind-brain-freeze
  3. ^ https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/244458.php
I mean serious WP:RS that don't use colloquial non-medical phrases such as "is caused by". And the quality of the books. This is a medical article let's be grown up. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm open to change my mind but you are not making a strong case tbh. The book I referenced was coauthored by a professor of psychology at Emory University[1] [2]. "Medical News Today (MNT) is owned and operated by Healthline Media UK Ltd., a leading healthcare publishing company"[3]. Cosmos is a leading science magazine in Australia, winner of 47 awards. [4]. I think that's serious WP:RS. Let's be grown up. Thinker78 (talk) 18:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://books.google.com.gt/books?id=8DlS0gfO_QUC&pg=PT54&lpg=PT54&dq=%22brain+freeze+is+caused+by%22&source=bl&ots=pMDyX1HwIr&sig=sbe6Z5syaG3xbIBmwsRSFwUtrDc&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22brain%20freeze%20is%20caused%20by%22&f=false
  2. ^ http://psychology.emory.edu/home/people/faculty/lilienfeld-scott.html
  3. ^ https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/about
  4. ^ https://cosmosmagazine.com/editorial
Thinker78 please can you not insert refs without a ref talk tag. And no, sorry, decision made, going with the scientific and accurate name The more you say the more the scientific name looks better. Sorry. Finish In ictu oculi (talk) 21:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Break

  • Oppose and move to cold-stimulus headache. Perfectly recognizable, and more accurate than "brain freeze". User:Plantdrew 20:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Plantdrew: What are your reasons to oppose move from "ice cream headache" to "brain freeze"? Remember that decisions in Wikipedia are made through consensus not voting. Thinker78 (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I call it an 'ice cream headache', meaning it is probably a Briticism. First major contributor, etc. 'Brain freeze' is sometimes heard, but not as often. –Sb2001 01:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
@Sb2001: How do you know it is sometimes heard but not as often? That contradicts my findings. Your statement needs a citation. I usually put verifiable information on my claims, so should you. Read my comments for further information. Thinker78 (talk) 02:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Aren't you perfect? I do not have to provide a citation for casual presentation of personal findings (ie what I hear on the street, amongst my friends and colleagues, etc) when adding to talk pages. Please do not tell me how to contribute to this sort of discussion. The same advice is given to everyone—get some perspective and then criticise others' comments. You have 239 non-automated article edits. Ie, there is little evidence to suggest that you know either the potential effects of this sort of move or how one is assessed and closed. 'I usually put verifiable information on my claims, so should you.' Wow! No: you choose to do that—it may make your comments carry more weight; it may not. Let me make my comments without your 'I know best' responses, please. –Sb2001 23:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
@Sb2001:Sorry, in my humble opinion I think I made the same mistake as you did as you can see in one of my comments above, saying that "I never heard of the term" as a reason to oppose. But the editor that replied to me made me realize that it was very irrelevant if I heard the term or not, that people are prone to WP:IDONTKNOWIT, and that I rather should find out how common is the term using appropriate tools, like a google search and compare the number of results of one vs the other and see reliable sources to determine the preponderance of the term as per WP:COMMONNAME. In my opinion it is better to provide verifiable sources of information as evidence. And that is something I learned when I tried to make a move and editors started showing me the evidence against my request. So I learned. Given that this is a consensus driven decision I will put my thoughts here so the decision maker can see if I indeed I'm mistaken due to my status of learning editor with few edits under his belt or if I am correct in what I'm saying. Thinker78 (talk) 04:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@Primergrey:Funny you oppose per tennis elbow, because another editor above (Red Slash) actually supports the move due to... tennis elbow. :) Thinker78 (talk) 04:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
That was my inspiration, actually. Primergrey (talk) 14:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
@Vanisaac:You make a big point in bringing those links about ambiguity to the discussion. Your links really made me work for a few hours. Altough I was torn, that evidence finally made me change my stance from support to opposition, even though I spent a significant amount of time supporting the move, as you can notice above. None of the other editors opposing the move made me change my mind because they didn't provide good reasons for their opposition nor they provided proper evidence.
MOS:PRECISION states that "Usually, titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article", but it also states "Exceptions to the precision criterion may sometimes result from the application of some other naming criteria", some of the latter includes recognizability and naturalness. WP:COMMONNAME states "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)", but what seems to seal the deal is that it also states "Ambiguous... names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources".
"Brain freeze" is an ambiguous name. Reliable sources use that term to refer to the headache[1] [2] [3], but they also refer to it for the memory lapse[4], although, given the difficulty in finding reliable sources support, not very much.
Given that "ice cream headache" is a recognizable and natural term, that it seems to be similarly prevalent as "brain freeze" in reliable English language sources as can be inferred from a sample of 20 results in Google [5][6] -although its use may be a few times lower as mentioned in my first comment all the way above, that even if "ice cream headache" use may not be as frequent as "brain freeze", its use is frequent enough, and that it is not an ambiguous term as "brain freeze" is, I think that I can come to the conclusion -if there is no further evidence presented against that changes my mind- that the move should not go ahead and that "ice cream headache" should remain the title of the article. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 01:26, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://books.google.com.gt/books?id=8DlS0gfO_QUC&pg=PT54&lpg=PT54&dq=%22brain+freeze+is+caused+by%22&source=bl&ots=pMDyX1HwIr&sig=sbe6Z5syaG3xbIBmwsRSFwUtrDc&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22brain%20freeze%20is%20caused%20by%22&f=false
  2. ^ https://cosmosmagazine.com/biology/science-behind-brain-freeze
  3. ^ https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/244458.php
  4. ^ https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mental-mishaps/201111/brain-freeze
  5. ^ https://www.google.com/search?q=%22ice+cream+headache%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=_cgQWrvQH8rLXu3oktgJ
  6. ^ https://www.google.com/search?q=%22brain+freeze%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-ab&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=e8oQWoqjH8rLXu3oktgJ
Right, so our aim is to convince you, and you alone? No: we work based on consensus. The quality of arguments presented are assessed by a closing—uninvolved—page mover. You really need to try not to WP:OWN discussions in the manner you have demonstrated here. I understand that you're new and enthusiastic, but you're going to end up annoying editors at this rate. I need to pay a visit to your talk page to discuss some issues I have noticed with your article edits. Expect that in the next few days (when I have enough time). On a positive note, I am pleased that you are listening to what others have to say, rather than adopting an approach such that everyone should think like you (I think the Americans would say, 'My way or the highway'). –Sb2001 02:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Per WP:OWN "Provided that contributions and input from fellow editors are not ignored or immediately disregarded, being the primary or sole editor of an article does not constitute ownership", "Do not confuse stewardship with ownership. Stewardship of an article (or group of related articles) may be the result of a sincere personal interest in the subject matter". Thinker78 (talk) 05:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I never claimed that I alone need to be persuaded. I have no idea why you say that. I think that in consensus everyone is trying to convince everyone -or at least I think that's the idea. I just pointed out that, in my opinion, other editors didn't provide good reasons to convince me to change my position -mainly to highlight the impact it had on me the evidence that Vanisaac brought, and to praise him for that. Per Wikipedia:Consensus#Achieving_consensus#Through_discussion: "editors open a section on the talk page and try to work out the dispute through discussion. Here editors try to persuade others, using reasons based in policy, sources, and common sense", "In determining consensus, consider the quality of the arguments, the history of how they came about, the objections of those who disagree, and existing policies and guidelines". Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 07:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm glad that I happened to see the invite on SMcCandlish's page and thought something was a bit off from how I'd seen the term used before. It's always nice to see someone really passionate about a position do a 180 when they realize there was a flaw in their original argument. I'm wondering if there isn't some guidance that should be incorporated into WP:COMMONNAME to help in this sort of situation in the future. VanIsaacWScont 05:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Vanisaac. When I saw this proposal, I immediately thought of the other use of brain freeze, when something you were trying to name or describe suddenly evaporates from your active recall. However, ice cream headache is likewise problematic, being too specific as to cause - sorbet and sherbet, ice pops and slushy drinks can all lead to this physiological effect, not just ice cream. I would support a move to cold-stimulus headache. Agricolae (talk) 06:18, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Migraine trigger

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello editors on this page, especially User:SMcCandlish and User:Thinker78. Back before Thanksgiving, I'd attempted to update this article with some information I felt was helpful, regarding the link between ice-cream headaches and migraines. I just saw on SMcCandlish's Talk page that I may have not used the sourcing quite right, so I apologize for that; I am still finding my way around Wikipedia and its guidelines and appreciate the feedback. In any case, I think that the changes made to my addition have changed the meaning of what I was trying to convey from the source. My main point is that cold stimulus headaches only last a minute or two, but they can trigger a migraine. Migraines by definition last 4-72 hours, so I think this is a big deal and is clinically important since ~12% of the population has migraine and triggering a migraine that can last for days has significantly more impact on a person's life than a cold-stimulus headache that lasts only minutes. Does that clear up what I was trying to add here? Should I / one of you have another go at making this wording right? Dr. Bob in Arizona (talk) 00:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Dr. Bob in Arizona:. Thank you for your contribution. The problem with your addition is that it didn't comply with the No original research policy, which states, "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source", and "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation... Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself". Per WP:PRIMARY, "Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved... a scientific paper documenting a new experiment conducted by the author is a primary source on the outcome of that experiment". Thinker78 (talk) 01:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I.e., we need secondary sources about this (a systematic or at least literature review). Wikipedia isn't a medical news or advice site; it's not our job to report cutting-edge, tentative health information. Research published tomorrow may contradict that primary-research paper completely. The world will keep going on just fine, including for migraine suffers, without Wikipedia suggesting they'd better watch out when it comes to ice cream. WP giving a warning about cold foods and migraines is "too soon"; the research hasn't reached secondary sourcing level yet – hasn't been confirmed with repeated testing by independent researchers of the initial claims.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  05:36, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Why do some people not get brain freezes?

Latest comment: 6 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

I do not get brain freezes. My friends and I recently conducted an experiment where I drank a slurpee as fast as I could to see if I could get a brain freeze or not. The only thing I succeeded in doing was finishing a perfectly good slurpee without enjoying it and receiving very cold pains in my chest and upper spinal area.

I was told that this only happens when one gets an extremely bad brain freeze, but I, however, never felt any "headache" or pain in my brain area.

Can anyone tell me why?

198.213.171.98 (talk) 01:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It has been my experience that usually those with sparse brain matter report this phenomenon. Those with heavier, denser brain material usually do not. In short, the stupider brain is more prone to freezing. Bulbous (talk) 00:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Right, that makes a lot of sense. </sarcasm> (and I presume you were being sarcastic as well) --173.52.1.202 (talk) 11:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
A serious answer to this question. It may have something to do with how you drink your slurpee. You may naturally drink your slurpee (or eat your ice cream) in a way that leaves minimal contact with the back of the roof of your throat, thus bypassing the rapid cooling of the nerves that would normally induce a brain freeze or ice cream headache. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FantajiFan (talk • contribs) 00:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

They say it was white and not black and other to get a brainfreeze". so this is a raciale aspect of the medical condition. It will only be with the white but not blacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.103.81.34 (talk) 14:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Suspected WP:HOAX

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I removed a passage that dates back to January 2013. The source claims to be an article called "The Scoop on Ice-Cream Headaches" from February 2003, in Issue 13 of Volume 88 of Current Science. However, Volume 88 of Current Science is from 2005 and only has 12 issues, and searching for the title gives no results. TompaDompa (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

The passage is describing the The BMJ paper referenced elsewhere in the article. The Scoop on Ice-Cream Headaches appears to be a science book for children that is merely citing the aforementioned BMJ paper. I've restored that passage for now, feel free to change the citation if you think it is misleading. A children's science book isn't adding much more than the original paper citation itself. Brandon (talk) 07:55, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I see. I changed the citation and edited the text to agree with what the research paper actually says. TompaDompa (talk) 14:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold-stimulus_headache/Archive_2&oldid=1216526087"