Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sankara Nethralaya


 * 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 of the debate was keep --Ichiro 19:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Sankara Nethralaya
The user who nominated this page for deletion did not complete the process. It was originally nominated for Speedy Deletion but the criteria did not qualify for an article. In my opinion, I vote for Delete Keep the rewrite.Ajwebb 19:35, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This article is a copyvio from, so speedy delete or list as copyvio instead. --dcabrilo 20:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've cleaned up the article.  Verifiable. I can't tell how notable it is, but fight systemic bias.  --Quarl 21:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Rewrite I think it's still too close to the text on their website (which clearly says Copyright © Medical Research Foundation).  But the article is worth keeping if it can be worked on a bit more. Keep the rewrite - well done Quarl   Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  22:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Good enough now? --Quarl 22:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - very notable in India. - Ganeshk 11:39, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definetly notable. -- Pamri &bull; Talk 14:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment for the time being : Looking for precedence, I looked around in the articles about the four metros and apart from the eight listed in Category:Medical_colleges_in_India I couldn't find any other hospitals. Even in Chennai, there are bigger and more important hospitals - Madras Medical Mission, Vijaya, Malar, Apollo, RMC Porur etc none of which seem to have articles about them. For articles about places, there is an unwritten rule that if the real is place is real, it can have an article. Unless there is some such convention, I don't know why this should be kept. Tintin Talk 18:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Sometimes the argument "articles less-notable-than-this are kept" is an argument to keep, and sometimes "articles more-notable-than-this have been deleted" is an argument to delete, but I don't see how "articles more-notable-than-this haven't yet been created" is an argument to delete. If you know about those hospitals, why not create articles for them?   &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2005-12-31 00:19Z 


 * My personal opinion is that except MMM (who pioneered heart transplant in India and is headed by the finest heart surgeon in South Asia) none of the others are significant enough to deserve an article. This is the first AfD that I have come across for an Indian hospital. So I'll probably vote delete this time, but depending on the decision reached here change the benchmark for the next one. Tintin Talk 00:36, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Shankara Netralaya is certainly notable. People from all over India come here. Its head Dr Bhadrinath is a well known doctor. Coming to the setting precedence question. It should not judged like places. Each hospital should be considered separately whenever it comes for an afd.--Raghu 15:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable, 'coz it is one of the three famous eye-hospitals in India that perform free eye-care to the poor and needy, the other two being Aravind Eye Hospital in Madurai and LVPEI in Hyderabad. --Gurubrahma 14:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep- its notability is beyond doubt, and even people from Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and several other countries come here for treatment. --Bhadani 14:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Based on comments on notability by very established Indian Wikipedians and the fact that the only "Delete" vote remaining was based on copyvio status at the time, I recommend SPEEDY KEEP. Expanding the article would be nice too, since I rewrote it without knowing anything about the subject.  &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-05 21:24Z 


 * 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.