Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hospitals in Jamaica


 * 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. Much the stronger argument, as well as numbers, to the Keep commentors. The idea of nominating this one article to try to set a precedent for other, perhaps stronger, articles also seems a bit fishy. Herostratus 06:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

List of hospitals in Jamaica

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a directory. Also, to plagarise from the initial debate, "I am not entirely sure whose bad idea this was. We do not need a list of every non notable hosptial in the entire world. Wikipedia is not a directory, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information".

Yes, I know there's 160+ of these lists in existance and a mass deletion was attempted before which failed due to procedural reasons but only one article is nominated here to set a precedent. MER-C 02:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * delete this approach worked nicely for towers. Time to start on these. DGG 03:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 *  Comment, no vote Keep - I see you chose a particularly weak article (none of the hospitals are wikilinked). Although I may favor the deletion of some of these articles, I am ambivalent about your deliberate exclusion of the rest from this AfD (although I thank you for being honest and noting it).  Why not bundle this nomination with the other articles? Black Falcon 04:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Because that was tried last time and it didn't work. MER-C 05:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Is that itself not a pretty clear indication that there is no consensus for deletion? I have no problem with you nominating this individual list for deletion, but I think it might be inappropriate if you use this as precedent for other lists.  If the same criticisms apply, nominate them all at once--especially since you know about them.  If the same criticisms don't apply, then any claim of "precedent" in the future is inapplicable.  Black Falcon 22:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is better dealt with as a category, with only the notable/major ones getting articles. Shrumster 05:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a particularly poor example of these hospital lists (possibly why it was chosen as a test case?), but the same principles apply. Many hospitals have wikipedia articles, and the number of them that do will no doubt slowly increase with time. A complete list, with both red and blue links, is the best way to keep track of which have yet to be created - a category cannot do that. This is no worse than many of the other similar list categories. DGG's reason for favouring delete actually casts doubts as to the efficacity of deletion: "This approach worked nicely on towers". What happened with towers was that individual articles on towers were turned into just such lists as these. These should similarly be kept as lists, so that any hospitals which may be deemed not worthy of having their own articles have somewhere where any information on them cound be merged. Grutness...wha?  09:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep this may be a poor example of an article, but the principle idea behind it is sound. Hospitals are reasonably capable of being notable.    Grouping them by geographic region is also a reasonable method of sorting.  I am not surprised this article is in poor condition, Jamaica is probably far behind in priority to most Wikipedia users.  FrozenPurpleCube 19:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I'm with DGG and MER-C on this one.  Edeans 20:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep this is useful as a development list, a valid use for a list. As per notability, some are notable, some may not be, that is not reason for deletion of the entire list. &mdash;siro&chi;o 21:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The arguments of MER-C and DGG seem predicated on the assumption that hospitals themselves, like radio towers, are not notable. I'm not sure I agree with that assumption.- Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 22:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I can't see how a hospital CAN be not notable Jcuk 22:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Because what differentiates one hospital from another enough to make them encyclopaedic? Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  23:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't advocate the "we have X, why not Y" argument, but a precedent of sorts is the somewhat ridiculous decision to keep school articles. There are far fewer hospitals than schools, hospitals are large, very prominent within their communities and surrounding areas, etc etc.  I am not strenuously arguing for intrinsic notability, but I don't think it should be dismissed out of hand.- Dmz5  *Edits**Talk* 04:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * To answer the question of differentiation between hospitals: History, location, services offered, events that happened at the hospital are a least some of the criteria I would apply.  Probably more, but I just figured it was worth answering.  FrozenPurpleCube 07:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.   --   &rArr; bsnowball  07:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Black Falcon, don't agree with the reasoning whatsoever behind the nominator using this as a test case to set some kind of "precedent" by preying on the weak. Mathmo Talk 08:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Unlike masts, which usually evoke feelings of antipathy, hospitals, by virtue of their nature, services, and their quality of care are usually of great interest to the public, and so are often subject of public information and/or news articles. Their building structures are usually well known beyond their catchment locality. I would draw the line at "clinics" (definitions may vary). The underlying subjects are notable, and the lists are capable of so being too if they impart useful additional information so I would vote Keep However, the system of these lists is a hotch-potch. The Jamaica list would benefit from being sorted by geography or by specialty, like some of the others. Ohconfucius 08:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have sorted it according to counties and parishes. Black Falcon 18:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. A country's health service is a very notable and encyclopedic part of their social services, and lists like this are a good aid in covering the topic. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, different hospitals are not "loosely associated topics" so MER-C can't base his deletion request on "WP:NOT". Besides, Jamaica seems a quite discriminate selection.  -- User:Docu


 * 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.