Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of state health care reform groups in the United States


 * 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   delete. --Selket Talk 17:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

List of state health care reform groups in the United States

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Seems inappropriate. Seem partily a soapbox. Just there to provide not even a list but a directory and set of external links to these reform organisations. Not encyclopaedic Canterbury Tail   talk  23:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep - The article is not a soapbox as the above editor suggests. All three major presidential candidates admit the drastic need for health care reform. The list is obviously open to any organization advocating health care reform at the state level regardless of the philosophical approach. As stated on the article's talk page: "Health care reform is a major topic in the United States, but almost all of the reform has been occurring at the state level. A list such as this can be very helpful in letting individuals and the media know of the organizations that are working toward reform in a particular state." The reason for the links is that another editor tagged it for speedy deletion citing a lack of references. The tag was removed by an admin. --Anoblecause (talk) 23:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is certainly a useful resource, but it's not encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a directory. Pburka (talk) 23:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Agreed, Wikipedia is not a directory, but this is a list and it does not meet the criteria of being defined as a directory on the Wikipedia page mentioned by the above editor. By labeling this list a "directory," then many, if not most, lists on Wikipedia would be directories and the resulting logic is that lists should be banned. Lists of magazines, books, radio shows, etc. would all be directories according to the above editor's interpretation. And I can't understand any argument that would claim that the issue of health care reform and the groups involved in that very important debate is not encyclopedic. --Anoblecause (talk) 01:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree. A list is a collection of Wikipedia articles, organized according to some criteria. A directory is a list of items which are not, on their own, encyclopedic. This is a just a list of links to external websites, i.e. a directory. Pburka (talk) 02:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A list is NOT defined as only a collection of Wikipedia articles, and the directory definition you linked to does not apply. These are YOUR definitions, not WP ones. I've made my case and since I work for a living I'll let other editors decide whether or not this article is worth keeping. --Anoblecause (talk) 03:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree that this is a (somewhat disguised) collection of external links. The subject of health care reform in the United States is treated in … well, Health care reform in the United States; and the introductory matter in this "list" is redundant with that. The plethora of redlinks show that the groups do not appear to be independently notable, and all that's left is the external links. If any of the groups are in fact notable, articles can be created on them, but they don't become notable through association in an article of this sort. Deor (talk) 03:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I will make one more response herein. Health care reform in the United States in the discussion page addresses the issue that state organizations should not be listed individually in that article. That is one of the purposes served by this list. --Anoblecause (talk) 04:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete though I agree with many of the points raised the article itself doesn't belong. relevant salient points can be addressed from a Neutral Point of View in the "State Role" section of Health care reform in the United States; Although a decent attempt at an informative article on a sometimes controversial issue the article itself looks more like a "linkfarm" with an introduction section and not a truly encylopedic article. I wouldn't be against removing the external "advertising" links and listing the organisations with properly neutral descriptions and reliable third party sources. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTLINK. If any of these organisations were notable enough to have an article, I'd suggest a category. Jakew (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I think these ones should be deleted anyway considering they are generic links redirecting to a very country specific page. Canterbury Tail  talk  12:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment If this is deleted then these redirects also need deleting.
 * 1) List of U.S. health care reform groups at the state level
 * 2) State health care reform
 * 3) State healthcare reform
 * 1) Health care reform groups
 * 2) Health care reform organizations
 * 3) Healthcare reform groups
 * 4) Healthcare reform organizations
 * 5) Health care groups
 * 6) Health care organizations
 * 7) Healthcare groups
 * 8) Healthcare organizations


 * Delete: Wikipedia is not advertising website and not directory.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lists (disriminate, organized, and verifiable list with real world notability). Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 05:16, 27 May 2008 (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.