Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Class IV heart defect


 * 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   redirect to Heart failure. v/r - TP 20:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Class IV heart defect

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article attempts to discuss the nature of the most advanced stage in the New York Heart Association Functional Classification of heart failure. The term "heart defect" is probably not valid here. Would otherwise have pushed for redirect. Delete instead. JFW &#124; T@lk  15:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:05, 25 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete. If this attempts to discuss NYHA IV as JFW suggests, most of the examples ("hole in the heart" etc.) are inappropriate. On the other hand, neither ICD-10 nor any other notable source seem to classify congenital heart defects under such a scheme. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 22:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  04:21, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Not a topic. There are a variety of entities that can be described as heart defect, and there are a variety of classification systems that have a class IV, but there is no generalized intersection to comprise an article.Novangelis (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Heart failure. Reflects part of this classification which is discussed at the target. Clearly not a medically accurate term but that is not a factor in redirects. Redirects are simply a search aid and since this is a used search term seems a useful solution. TerriersFan (talk) 04:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Heart failure. Redirects are cheap, and as User:TerriersFan points out, valid search term, if not a correct medical terminology. BusterD (talk) 13:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.