Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subcrepitant

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 Rales . EdJohnston (talk) 04:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subcrepitant

I'm AFD'ing per WP:NOTDICDEF. Would CSD, but I'd much rather get consensus on this. Thanks. ~Beano~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. Complete contents: "Subcrepitant is a term used to grossly describe a lung that has been infected with a viral or other obligate intracellular pathogen. This pattern is commonly involved in pneumonitis." If true, this is a medical dictdef. --Lockley (talk) 20:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to rale per Uncle G's comment below. --Lockley (talk) 23:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's also wrong. The actual things that are described as subcrepitant are râles. They can also be dry, moist, crackling, gurgling, coarse, fine, and sibilant. (I kid you not. There's a lecture in the 1861-12-07 American Medical Times by Austin Flint on all of this.) This sort of misleading article is what one gets from ignoring the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (adjectives). An adjective is not an article title. The best place to discuss this classification (the original sibilant/subcrepitant classification being an invention of René Laënnec) is of course in our article on râles, alongside all of the other types. Redirect, per our naming conventions. Uncle G (talk) 21:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Dicdef, erroneous per Uncle G. JFW | T@lk 23:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.