Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. P. Phillips Hospital


 * 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 Orlando Health. (non-admin closure)  Onel 5969  TT me 13:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Dr. P. Phillips Hospital

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence for notability of this relatively small hospital. Already included in the article on the system. Possible a redirect would be justified.  DGG ( talk ) 20:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Orlando Health ad although I found several links at Books, News and Highbeam, there's nothing to suggest better improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 23:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment - I am looking at WP:OUTCOMES which leads to WikiProject Hospitals. I see that it meets all the requirements except I am not sure about the indepth source. Here is a link to many books where it is talked about but I do not have access to determine the depth of coverage within. Thoughts?? --CNMall41 (talk) 00:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:12, 10 October 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Editorially redirect without prejudice to undoing the redirect and without prejudice to a fast re-nomination. It's simply better off as a redirect than as a stub.  If it is reverted-and-expanded tomorrow and the editor does NOT provide sufficient references to demonstrate that the topic is notable, it can be brought back to AFD for discussion.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  01:47, 19 October 2015 (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.