Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HIV/AIDS prophylaxis in British Columbia


 * 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. Keeping based on the rationale presented by. They are one of Wikipedia's foremost writers about public health and I concur the work presented in the article shows that this subject passes GNG and is important in its own right. Thanks everyone for your participation and assuming good faith! Missvain (talk) 16:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

HIV/AIDS prophylaxis in British Columbia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article, written at least partially like a health care policy analysis report rather than an encyclopedia article and referenced much more strongly to primary source governmental and organizational documents rather than reliable source media coverage, about a fairly WP:MILL topic. The core problem here is that you could essentially write the exact same article, differing only in the statistics and the details of who pays for the service, for every other Canadian province, every other U.S. state, and every other division of any other country where health care is managed by state or provincial governments rather than national ones -- but I'm not seeing a compelling reason why we would need dozens or hundreds of functionally identical articles about "same thing in different place". (Sample text from the article: "The steps for obtaining PrEP in BC are as follows: speaking to a physician, getting some medical tests, enrolling and being given a prescription, and refilling the prescription." But that's exactly the way all health care always works everywhere, and isn't a uniquely noteworthy aspect of this particular topic.) And in addition to the fact that so many of the sources are from governments and ASOs rather than media outlets, many of them aren't even specifically about British Columbia -- 12 of the 35 footnotes here, a full third of the entire footnote pool, are sitting in the "Coverage in other areas of Canada" section to support what every other province or territory in Canada that isn't British Columbia does, several more are about HIV/AIDS prophylaxis in Germany or the United States without even addressing Canada at all let alone British Columbia specifically, and a lot of what's left after that is just about the general and universal concept of HIV prophylaxis rather than addressing British Columbia's program as a standalone topic. So for all of those reasons, I just don't see a convincing reason why "HIV/AIDS prophylaxis in British Columbia" would need its own standalone article as a separate topic from HIV/AIDS prophylaxis everywhere else. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to HIV/AIDS in Canada. I don't think there's enough information on BC specifically to meet GNG. buidhe 20:11, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to HIV/AIDS in Canada per Buidhe and nominator's rationale. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 23:08, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per my own essay at Removal of Wikipedia articles on notable topics. The subject of this article passes WP:GNG, which is the criteria for inclusion into Wikipedia. If we merged this article in entirety then the next step would be deletion of 90% of this content. This content would be WP:UNDUE for HIV/AIDS in Canada and a merge is not a pathway to keeping well-cited content in this article which is specific to BC.
 * I agree with the nominator - "you could essentially write the exact same article... for every other Canadian province, every other U.S. state, and every other division of any other country". I am in support of purging this article about the routine information which applies everywhere, like "patients who want the drug start by talking with their doctor".
 * I like these articles because there is a huge amount of investment in public health research by region. Responding to HIV/AIDS in BC requires a huge amount of funding and lots of research is published on this general topic and the individual subject of prep. Medical topics draw a lot of special research publications and we have plenty of articles cited which are Vancouver BC + PreP.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  16:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NEXIST. Bad article, notable topic. This program is unique and notable. Very important also is that it is working. --- C &amp; C  (Coffeeandcrumbs) 09:04, 21 January 2020 (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.