Talk:Boot (medicine)

Merger discussion

Yesterday, I dropped by the Chicago Public Library to see if they could help me research Boot (medicine), which is stub-class, so I could get some WP:CUP points. The research librarian came upon the Walking boot article, which is start-class. Clearly these need to be merged. Here are the facts: Walking boot was created in User space on 22:29, October 24, 2012‎, moved to WP:AFC space on 01:10, October 25, 2012‎ and moved to main space 03:12, August 10, 2015‎. Boot (medicine) was created by me in main space 03:33, November 25, 2012‎. Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/STEM/Archive_2#Add_Boot_(medicine) was closed at WP:VA5 on 16:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC). Walking boot seems to be getting the pageviews and incoming links for this subject and seems to have the encyclopedic content.

Undoubtedly these subjects should be merged. The questions are 1.) what the merge destination should be and 2.) how the edit histories should be handled. The discussion of this merger probably needs to focus on where the destination of the merge should be. The number of bolded terms in the WP:LEAD of Walking boot suggests that there are numerous possible merge destinations. Here is a summary of the points in favor of the two existing locations. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Note that the original userspace name was "CAM (Controlled Ankle Motion) walking boot", which seems to have been used until it emerged from AFC in 2015.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• Boot (medicine):

1. The main argument is WP:COMMONNAME. If I were to search this subject I would enter the term boot. Then, I would probably realize I need to disambiguate for filtration purposes. I would actually have thought to disambiguate using medical rather than walking. I had never heard the term walking boot before.
2. WP:MED prefers (medicine) to (medical) or any other disambiguation, according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles#Titles_requiring_disambiguation
3. This article appeared in main space before the other article.
4. This subject is a vital article subject.

• Walking boot:

1. Earliest edit on this subject is part of this edit history.
2. The encyclopedic content of this destination is more substantial
3. The incoming links are all focussed on this destination
4. The current page view shows this as primary (probably due to the point above).

It is my belief that both WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles#Titles_requiring_disambiguation point to the merger destination of Boot (medicine). Thus, I propose a discussion of Merge to Boot (medicine) as the destination.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

• Support merge to Boot (medicine). Due to WP:COMMONNAME and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Medicine-related_articles#Titles_requiring_disambiguation.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

  Common name asks what the name of the subject is in RSes, not what we personally would search for it. -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 23:42, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

  So I am looking some athletes. I now see the term (walking) boot exists both ways sometimes within the same article

  Both ways ([1], [2], headline says boot only, [3])

  Boot only ([4], [5], protective boot)

  Walking boot only ([6], [7])

  Now that I am paying attention to some of these articles Walking boot may be more proper. I don't ever use the term when I talk to my sports friends. We usually just say boot, but the proper term may be walking boot. I have also seen protective boot (less common). Not sure.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

  I threw these search terms in on google and got mostly walking boot: "injury intitle:boot site:si.com", "injury intitle:boot site:nba.com".

  It was more mixed at "injury intitle:boot site:mlb.com" and "injury intitle:boot site:nfl.com" after the first few results.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• Merge Walking boot into Boot (medicine) and make the former a redirect to Hiking boot and fix up any incoming links that should go to the medical article instead. I don't know if this is an WP:ENGVAR thing, but in the UK "walking boots" are hiking boots, like you'd buy in an outdoor shop. They aren't just for climbing mountains: you might just wear them to walk the dog, or do an afternoon stroll along a public footpath, but certainly nobody would think of that kind of plastic medical device. Btw, does anyone know what template/link should be placed on Talk:Walking boot so editors there know of this discussion? -- Colin°^Talk 12:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
• User:Colin did you mean to inquire about a template for Talk:Hiking boot?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:48, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Nothing jumps off the page at {{Pam see also documentation}}.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:10, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

    I think I was looking at the hiking boot talk page which I thought was the walking boot talk page and got confused. However, shouldn't your two merge templates be on the article page not the talk page. Otherwise you are only going to get participation from limited audience. That seems to be the pattern at pages that link to Merge. -- Colin°^Talk 14:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

    • I guess I wasn't thinking clearly. These templates do belong on the article page. I have moved them.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:48, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• support merge to Boot (medicine) per TonyTheTiger --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
• Yes, definitely merge, and I suggest that the resulting article be called Walking boot per the preference in Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming the specific topic articles for "natural disambiguation". Lots of things get called boots, and most of them get walked in, but within the limits of my own experience, if someone says "I have a walking boot", they always mean the medical kind. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

  @WhatamIdoing I get you are specifically quoting the very rare case where someone is explicitly mentioning having only one of a kind of footwear. The fact that it is singular gives away that it is a special device that the other foot doesn't need. But for plural, which our articles titles don't tend to be, are you saying nobody outside of the UK says "walking boots" to mean boots for walking on muddy paths and over hills? That "hiking boots" is the only term in the US? Because I had to go through pages and pages of google results for "walking boot" restricted to UK, to find this obscure NHS page using the term (other NHS pages use terms like orthopaedic boot, walker boot or just boot). Even if I search for "hiking boots" I get pages like:

  • https://www.gooutdoors.co.uk/mens/footwear/walking-boots/ Men's walking boots
  • https://www.decathlon.co.uk/men/walking-boots WALKING BOOTS FOR MEN
  • https://www.millets.co.uk/footwear/mens-footwear/walking-boots/ Men's Walking Boots
  • https://www.mountainwarehouse.com/footwear/walking-boots/ Walking Boots
  • https://www.scarpa.co.uk/collections/walking-boots-and-shoes Walking Boots and Shoes
  • https://www.grisport.co.uk/walking-boots-c78 WALKING BOOTS

  And on and on. So all I can say is that readers from the UK would be WP:ASTONISHED to find an article on a plastic boot cast. A few examples:

  • UK outdoor closing brand Trespass (clothing) has an incorrect link to walking boots
  • Walking in the United Kingdom has to use "[[Hiking boots|walking boots]]"
  • Walking boots redirects to Walking boot.

  There aren't really that many pages that link to Walking boot for us to consider natural link names a huge problem. Mostly a few medical articles and a handful of American football player articles. Whereas a google search ' "walking boots" site:en.chped.com ' turns up a lot of potential references to outdoor boots being called "walking boots" that could naturally wikilink to the hiking boots article via a redirect. -- Colin°^Talk 18:02, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think I have ever heard anyone say something like "Let me put on my walking boots, and then we can go outside". The main types of boots (in the generic/unspecified sense) are work boots, rain boots, snow boots, cowboy boots, and hiking boots. If you are speaking within a particular subject, one might differentiate, e.g., between riding boots (slanted high heel and smooth sole, perfect for stirrups) and muck boots (for dirty work in the barn; easy to hose off) and roper boots (suitable for driving, grocery shopping, and dancing, regardless of whether your dancing involves keeping your toes out from under humans or cattle). Sport-specific gear (e.g., ski boots, mountain climbing boots) exists, and you might specify certain fashion aspects (e.g., Chelsea boots, Ugg boots, dress boots). But if there's such a thing as "walking boots" for just walking over hills, I'm pretty sure it would be considered a specialized subtype of hiking boots and just called hiking boots unless (maybe) you were talking to an expert. See, e.g., the options in https://www.rei.com/c/mens-boots You'd probably find it by searching for hiking boots and specifying the features you wanted it to have. (They would probably also look a lot more like what you all call trainers than like a traditional boot, only in some sort of appeal-to-nature brown or olive green than whatever color the kids these days want sneakers to be. I gave up on sneakers some years ago, when they were in a neon phase.)

  Orthopedic boot sounds like a good option for a name. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

  I think Orthopedic boot is a good choice for the name for this plastic cast. If I stick that into Google then my results overwhelmingly match this article topic for a plastic cast thing. An orthopedic shoe is a different thing that should probably link to Shoe#Orthopedic.

  @Guerillero, @Ozzie10aaaa, @TonyTheTiger would you be happy with orthopedic boot as the destination for the merged article. I've had a good search and there doesn't seem to be a clear winning common term everyone uses, with product trade names tending to get used. The existing Walking boot article mostly uses "CAM walker" but that's a trademark of Alimed (where CAM stands for controlled ankle movement).

  • this NHS page calls it an "Orthopaedic orthotic boot"
  • MyHealth.Alberta.ca calls it "Orthopedic Boot"
  • Dartmouth Hitchcock calls it an "Aircast boot" which is a trademark.
  • Orthotix calls them "Walker boot" and I note that on this page they suggest they are a kind of orthosis.
  • Orthobrace calls them a "walker boot"
  • PhysioSupplies ie calls them "Orthopaedic boots" and the word "walker" appears in a lot of the product names.
  • Medical Supplies UK calls them "walker boot".
  • ErgoActives.com calls them "an orthopedic boot".
  • HPFY.com calls them "An orthopedic boot"
  • icliniq calls them "orthopedic boot"

  Can we agree on this compromise name that is in use in the literature and avoids the confusion with the UK term for a hiking boot. If instead folk think "walking boot" is the best name, I think we need to open this discussion to more than just the medical project. Because a decision about what the walking boot article should be (or redirect to) isn't really a medical one. -- Colin°^Talk 10:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

  What about Protective boot? I am also wondering about the term Pneumatic ankle brace, which a 1997 obituary ascribes as an invention of a Glenn Walter Johnson Jr.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

  I think we have to pick something that at least some of the sources use, if we can't find a clear winner that is without conflict in terms of other meanings. The "protective boot" doesn't seem to be a term I've found, though the boot does offer protection. The "pneumatic ankle brace" term seems to find other things that are ankle braces but not quite like this. In the UK it seems split between "walker boot" and "orthopeadic boot" or just using the product name. -- Colin°^Talk 19:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

  I am not opposed to orthopedic boot, although it is not what I see in the type of web usage I do.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

  "Walker boot" seems to be specific enough and used by most of the marketing brands in UK, would seem to be the name most searched for. Amazon.com uses a mix of walker and walking. The page Walking boot mostly uses the term "walker". --Iztwoz (talk) 10:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

  Protective boot sounds like work boots to me (though I don't remember seeing that term in use). It sounds like a Steel-toe boot or various types of hazard-related boots (e.g., acid-resistant, insulated against electricity; see the list in this store's blog). WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey all: TonyTheTiger, Guerillero, Colin, Ozzie10aaaa, Iztwoz.

Based on this discussion, I suggest the following:

• This content end merged up at Orthopedic boot/Orthopaedic boot (ENGVAR to be chosen by whoever does the work to merge the pages).
• Walking boot becomes a DAB page that lists Hiking boot (first) and Orthopedic boot.

What do you think? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

agree--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Agree but Walker boot ought to be a redirect to the page as there is no other usage of the term, and it would need to be included as there are a number of different types of Walker boot available. And as Colin pointed out Walking boot is already given as an aka of hiking boot. Since a Walking boot may also be used to refer to a Walker boot in the US maybe a mention of "for orthopaedic walking boot see Orthopaedic boot' on Hiking boot page.?Iztwoz (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I think such a hatnote on hiking boot would only be necessary if walking boot directed straight to it, which was my original idea but not WAID's. Otherwise, nobody arriving at "hiking boot" is in any way thinking about orthopaedic boots. WAIDs proposal of a dab page means readers are already aware of the two meanings of the word. I do additionally propose that walking boots (plural) be a redirect to hiking boot as you'd need to be very unlucky to need two orthopaedic boots (and I reckon it would be difficult to walk in such a pair of boots too). Otherwise I agree with WAID's proposal and with Iztwoz's suggestion that walker boot redirect to the chosen destination too. -- Colin°^Talk 08:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)