Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health information on Wikipedia


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:41, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Health information on Wikipedia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an article on ourselves. We have an irreconcilable conflict of interest in writing it; WP:NPOV can never truly be satisfied. I'm sure similar articles exist on other aspects of Wikipedia's merits, and they should all be deleted for the same reason. Mangoe (talk) 14:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep As long as the article reports what secondary sources have said there is no problem. A quick glance at the footnotes show this is considered a serious (notable) topic by many people not involved in WP.  And not everyone who edits WP is pro-WP.  This and most of our desire to be fair should take care of POV problems. Borock (talk) 16:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Make that: "the desire of most of us to be fair..." Borock (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The secondary sources in the article show the notability of the topic and also provide a foundation for writing the article. There is nothing inherent in Wikipedia topics that prevent well-balanced articles from being written based on independent reliable sources. Conflict of interest is usually about financial interest; but most WP editors are volunteers and many are anonymous to boot. See Wikipedia for an example of an article on us that strives to be balanced. It's not perfect, but is far from an untamed self-love fest. --Mark viking (talk) 19:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Just need to be careful. We also have an article on Wikipedia. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep the conflict of interest isn't a reason for deletion, and the idea that most editors who edit articles about Wikipedia do so in a positive manner is perhaps a bit naive.AioftheStorm (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. I think it is snowing. This is an excellent article that fully meets our policies and guidelines. Whether wikipedia is reliable as a source on health matters is something that readers want to know about. We can provide that information and we do so in this article. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  00:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia and some of its content is now so prominent as to be independently notable. There has been chat in the press about the health content (including the recent discussion about a medical disclaimer). That makes the subject inherently notable. Ideally we should be using secondary sources, but there are not many of them available. JFW &#124; T@lk  22:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Where is the discussion on a health disclaimer? I think that's a great idea. Borock (talk) 08:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - the nomination statement/justification is completely impractical. Ignore the Wikipedia context for a moment - "This is an article on ourselves. We have an irreconcilable conflict of interest in writing it; WP:NPOV can never truly be satisfied."  That's exactly equivalent to a justification for stating US citizens have a COI in editing United States. Or, in complete generality (and in a nutshell), members of a particular group have a COI with articles on that group.   Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 01:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Wikipedia is not a proscribed topic. Thanks for creating this, Bluerasberry. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 16:32, 8 January 2014 (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.