Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Going with Cunard on this one. Missvain (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a local affiliate of a large national organization.

There are many dozens of these throughout the US, and I do not see that any of them are specifically notable, or that they are of any interest to people outside the region they serve. It's therefore not our practice to include them, or we would be violating NOTDIRECTORY

There is not a single source except a local newspaper. (Kansas City Business Journal is a place to publish pR, and thus not a RS any more than the press releases that it publishes. This is, as one would expect, an article by a declared paid editor  DGG ( talk ) 00:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 'Merge with Blue Cross Blue Shield Association: There is also a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, which could be both merged into the parent article. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association isn't big enough to warrant a content fork either. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!|!!1!1|11!|!! (talk) 01:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City plans to pull out of the Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchanges, a move that likely leaves a swath of northwestern Missouri with no available marketplace plans for next year." Heaster, W. Randolph (1988-12-12). "Blue Cross hoping to rebound. Experts say '89 will be tough year" (pages 1 and 2). Kansas City Times. Archived from the original (pages 1 and 2) on 2021-04-26. Retrieved 2021-04-26 – via Newspapers.com. The article notes: "As a central player in an industry racked by losses over the last two years, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City is struggling to emerge from its hard times. Here is another article in the same issue of the newspaper about this:   The article notes: "Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City was warned yesterday by a state Senate select committee that it would be subjecting itself to severe legislative regulation if it does not correct the causes of a large volume of complaints the state is hearing from its policyholders." <li> The article notes: " Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City suffered disappointing financial results in its health maintenance organizations last year but enjoyed a turnaround in some insurance operations. ... The 1996 results were filed with the Missouri Department of Insurance recently in a tumultuous time for Blue Cross, the biggest health insurer in the Kansas City area. Blue Cross's effort to convert to for-profit, publicly traded status failed last year amid legislative wrangling in Jefferson City."</li> <li> The article notes: "John P. Mascotte takes over the leadership of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City at a watershed time for the company, the city's largest health insurer. Blue Cross' name has surfaced in a federal investigation into political corruption in Kansas City. It has faced legal and regulatory problems, even agreeing last year to repay $2.7 million for allegedly overcharging thousands of policyholders. ... The company last year negotiated a $2.7 million settlement with Kansas and Missouri after it was accused of overcharging some policyholders. Regulators contended that from 1988 to 1994, Blue Cross negotiated discounts on procedures from hospitals but did not pass the savings on to policyholders when policyholders paid their co-payments."</li> <li> The article notes: "A new report shows that for the first time last year Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City made more money on the Obamacare exchange than it paid in claims. The bond ratings agency Standard & Poor’s analyzed Blue Cross plans in 32 parts of the country and found that most are figuring out how to better set premiums to meet the cost of new enrollees as the Affordable Care Act exchanges begin their fourth year. Blue KC is a prime example."</li> <li> The article notes: "Lobbyists for the Kansas City Blues have spent hundreds of dollars wining and dining state Sens. DePasco and Curls. The senators' bill would release Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City from any legal requirement to surrender its assets after converting to a for-profit company. Instead, the Kansas City Blues would have to provide about $35 million for public use over 20 years - about $1.75 million per year."</li> <li> The article notes, "Stovall said she was also concerned that Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, as a Missouri public benefit corporation, 'may be precluded from participating in a merger with the Kansas company because of limitations under Missouri law.'"</li> <li> The article notes: "With an estimated $1.6 billion in revenue this year, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City is a relatively small player in this multibillion-dollar market, competing against companies more than 10 times bigger in a 30-county area in Northwest Missouri and the two most populated counties in Kansas that make up Kansas City. Nevertheless, BCBSKC is the largest health insurer in the region, providing coverage for 900,000 people and garnering a 42 percent market share."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 09:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Pinging Articles for deletion/Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City participants:, , , , , , , , , , and . Cunard (talk) 09:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Keep per Cunard. Clearly passes WP:SIGCOV. Further, due to state regulatory and legal powers of state governments in health care, there are enough differences from state to state to make merging them under one article not valuable to the reader. Unlike what the nominator is suggesting, national health care brands are not operating as a coordinated national company. Each state version of Blue Cross and Blue Shield is really its own company operating under its own unique structure which is tailored to the structures put in place by state legislation.4meter4 (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cunard has presented multiple sources that are independent and verified. Though not all of the sources provided have claims of notability, based on the sources provided it should pass WP:GNG.SunDawn (talk) 15:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep we've gone through this before with an AFD and I see no reason to overturn the original, plus there some new arguments above to keep.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment as I was pinged above: My opinion in the first AfD, and previously on the article's Talk page, was that this lacked specific notability and should be redirected. An inherent feature of insurance is that risk is spread across a large number of customers, and all companies have to do business subject to local regulations, with ups and downs which can be of local interest: I don't think the available coverage strongly indicates encyclopaedic notability. However, the October 2019 AfD consensus was to keep this article and I am not seeing this re-nomination making a strong case to set aside that previous conclusion. AllyD (talk) 11:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.