Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural health (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 delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Cultural health
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:G4 might apply here, but I can't tell because the previous version was deleted in 2005. recreated the page with the edit summary Adding Stub (someone deleted the last one without notice) see discussion page for more info), but Aunk had edited the previous AFD twice, so clearly they were given plenty of notice. The "more info" on the talk page appears to assume the page was deleted because of POV issues, but only one delete !voter even mentioned POV. Essentially, the page was recreated based on a flawed premise, and I have no reason to believe the previous status quo has changed even twelve years later, let alone one year later when the page was recreated. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 11:18, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 September 2.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 11:40, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:17, 2 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment. WP:G4 is not really a problem here. I've just checked, and this article is sufficiently different from the version that was deleted in 2005; at least, the more contentious and original research aspects of the 2005 version are no longer included. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Very well. Anyway, if the article was deleted as containing nothing but OR, that seems to indicate that the topic itself is OR. A quick Googling brings up a few non-wiki hits, but those appear to be describing different concepts to our article: Comparative and Cross-cultural Health Research, Mosby's Pocket Guide to Cultural Health Assessment, Doorway Thoughts: Cross Cultural Health Care for Older Adults, etc. all take the form of "cultural [health assessment]" or "[cross-cultural] health". The fact that the same user recreated the article with no citations of reliable sources, except one WP:BLUE sentence whose source almost certainly doesn't use the term "cultural health", does not bode well. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 11:09, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:20, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:22, 16 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article does not describe its subject clearly and has only one source, which does not itself use the phrase "cultural health". If this is a topic worthy of encyclopedic coverage, the article probably needs to be completely rewritten with proper sources. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, per User:Metropolitan90, this seems to be a buzzword or neologism that hasn't caught on. No objection to a redirect if a suitable target can be found.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:05, 24 September 2017 (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.