Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elective caesarean section


 * 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 Caesarean section. Consensus to merge/split following relisting. The Bushranger One ping only 04:20, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Elective caesarean section

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

"Elective caesarean section" is a commonly used term but it is problematic because it is used in different ways in layman and medical literature. The actual content in this article should be merged to Caesarean section and Caesarean delivery on maternal request, because it is forks of those articles with nothing new. Check the article history - I already moved a lot and the rest can go too.

The problem is that "elective" means "scheduled or planned" in a medical sense and "optional" in a layman sense. The confusion comes because frequently when the surgery is scheduled, it is also because it is optional and not medically indicated, thus people schedule optional surgeries or elect to have elective surgeries.

Information about planned necessary surgeries should go into the article on c-section, because nowhere else do scheduled surgeries have their own articles. Information about planned unnecessary surgeries should go to the "maternal request" article, which I am proposing to rename "unnecessary caesarean section".  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  14:24, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note For people voting keep, I would like to see a source discussing this topic only. Many sources include this topic as part of discussion on caesarean section, and a lot more sources talk about this in the context of unnecessary caesarean sections. I am not sure if this subject is discussed as distinct from c-sections except when it is unnecessary.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  16:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge with Caesarean section. Caesarean section on clinical indication is performed either as an emergency or electively. Those that are performed on maternal request are characteristically not emergencies; that's not the same as "elective". JFW &#124; T@lk  19:22, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge with Caesarian section and Caesarean delivery on maternal request, but with much more clarification in the Caesarian section article about the differences between these concepts. I would not agree with renaming Caesarean delivery on maternal request because it is clinical terminology and used in the literature (example), I will also add to the discussion there. --Gccwang (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 05:01, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The nomination seems to me to present a strong case for keeping the article. It is very much encyclopedic to try to clear up popular misunderstandings that may be widespread. So, I then wondered whether the article in its present state might be very poor in explaining the matter. But no, it does a good job, in good part due to the improvements the nominator has made. I don't have an objection in principle to merge but I think it is unnecessary, even somewhat undesirable. I think this article should not deal with CS generally, leaving that to the main article, but limit itself to the issues specifically concerned with the "elective" and "emergency" aspects. The target article is sufficiently long (and under the right title for the main article) for a breakout article with good cross-links to be a good idea. Finally, and most importantly, this title must not be left as a red link. The expression is widely used and people will want to find out what it means and so will be able to discover it is simply a caesarian section that has been planned in advance. I expect, however, the nominator is really suggesting creating a redirect rather than actually expunging the title. Thincat (talk) 07:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge - seems an uncontroversial matter per WP:FORK; the issue is not whether the material should be kept within the encyclopedia but whether there should be multiple articles on the matter. Whether an operation is 'elective' or not, it's an operation. Clearly it's not just a redirect because the reasons for having the operation may vary, and may have medical and ethical implications, but still, it's the same op. BTW it's hard to see why there should be more than one article on Caesarean section: certainly not three. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge the article seems to clumsily suggest a "third path" between an emergency caesarean and a "caesarean delivery on maternal request". In fact, an "elective" caesarean would seem to fit within the definition of a CDMR. This would seem to be an Australianism where "elective" means a specific thing. But as an Australian parent, nothing at Caesarean delivery on maternal request strikes as different to my understanding of an "elective caesarean". The sources would seem to confirm as much. Suggest the content be merged to Caesarean section as appropriate with the title redirected to Caesarean delivery on maternal request.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 08:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge this article creates unnecessary confusion, when in fact this appears simply to be a subset of Caesarean delivery on maternal request. Nwlaw63 (talk) 13:47, 25 September 2014 (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.