Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embrace (organization)


 * 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 and move to Embrace (incubator). King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Embrace (organization)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article is just one big advertisement. The company doesn't seem to be very notable and the text sounds like it's straight from the company website. Andrew vdBK ( talk ) 18:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The article is not breaching Wikipedia's policies and does not require deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.144.20 (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC) — 98.210.144.20 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 06:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I couldn't find anything reliable on Google, and the references in the article are about people and products affiliated with the organization rather than the organization itself.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 18:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is a redirect from Embrace (incubator) where it should currently be. Redirected in September 2009 with the reason that it "seems to be about an organization, not an incubator".1 I can't argue about that, the article has evidently been written by someone within Embrace given the self descriptions used.  However, while the content is very poor, the subject matter is not.  It passes notability in that there are dozens of news articles, if not hundreds, regarding the incubator, its history and the organization.1 2 3  While the article does not communicate what was originally intended, it should not be deleted on the grounds mentioned.  The people involved in the organization are themselves notable, the President of Stanford University is on the advisory board for example.  GE Healthcare have signed up as partners with Embrace to distribute the incubators 4 5 along with international recognition for the organization, it's product and mission. 6 7 8 9 Originating from a university class two years ago they are now a few months away from distributing the incubator which will be helping to save the lives of the most needy infants.  It is not only notable, it is noble. Jørdan 11:02, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Move to Embrace (incubator), or better yet, to Neonatal incubator, which need not redirect to the Equipment section of Neonatal intensive-care unit, but rather be a Main Article of that section. Agree with Jordan that the rest is just a rewrite issue. I have taken the liberty of rewriting; someone may want to add back the names of the founders, or other changes, as I wrote it with the 'Neonatal incubator' article in mind. Anarchangel (talk) 01:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep, maybe move- the product looks notable, and the article provides interesting information. It needs a rewrite or a restructure, not deleting.--Physics is all gnomes (talk) 14:06, 13 January 2011 (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.