Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UCLA Health System


 * 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 no consensus. No consensus for a particular action has arisen in this discussion. North America1000 07:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

UCLA Health System

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable bureaucratic subunit, not much in sources about bureaucracy itself. Article creator admits that topic has received "very little independent" coverage. Regards, James(talk/contribs) 03:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as there's nothing to actually suggest solid independent notability, still questionable to keep as its own article thus delete. SwisterTwister   talk  06:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. The UCLA Health System is not a department or sub-unit of UCLA. It is associated with a medical school on campus, it is in complex ways interwoven with the campus, but it is primarily a health care company which plans, as the article states, to expand in the LA County and serve 4 million people. That is pretty notable. The expansion of UCLA Health System is in full swing, triggered by the Affordable Care Act, and will accelerate in the near future. The somewhat arcane and hard to find governance changes highlighted in the article prepare for this corporate expansion. The budget of the UCLA Health system equals that of the entire rest of the campus. http://ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_files/workforce-profiles/workforce-profile-2012.pdf chart 25 shows that for 2012, 50 % of all FTE positions at UCLA were funded through the Health System ("Hospital/Health Science Funds"). It is notable, right?
 * Argument for distinctiveness: 1) they have different URLS (ucla.edu vs uclahealth.org). 2) The State of California, Employment Development Department, list of major employers in Los Angeles list UCLA and UCLA Health as distinct entities . If the state keeps them apart, Wikipedia should not mix them up
 * Argument for notability (published sources): Joseph A Michelli: Prescription for excellence: leadership lessons for creating a world-class customer experience from UCLA Health System published by McGraw Hill in New York in 2011. The book has been translated into Chinese. This is a widely published author who has also written books about Starbucks, Ritz Hotels, Zappos (shoes), Merzedes Benz, etc. See Joseph_Michelli, that article does not mention the author's lack of independence (to address Mark viking qualms below)
 * Argument for consistency: Because many other campus affiliated health care centers have their own Wikipedia articles. (see Category https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Academic_health_science_centres and the list in Academic_health_science_centre where approx 40 such centers for the USA are listed with WPlinks) Velocipedus (talk) 06:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Casting multiple !votes is not appropriate. I've modified your comments for clarity. Please review Articles for deletion before contributing further. Regards, James(talk/contribs) 18:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to University of California, Los Angeles, where it is discussed. The UCLA Health system is notable for a massive data breach, , that made the national news, but I have been unable to find independent reliable sources on the health system itself. The book mentioned by Velocipedus is about the institution, but but doesn't look to be independent. No prejudice to re-creation if multiple independent RS become available. --Mark viking (talk) 08:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I would be in favor of this proposal in the alternative. Regards, James(talk/contribs) 00:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. I believe it is a huge organization, and it does not merely serve students, faculty and staff of UCLA, the university.  Some statistics on its size (doctors, staff, patients served, revenues, assets, square footage) would definitely help.  But it includes four hospitals, listed in the article, each of which is individually notable.  Ergo the larger organization is notable. -- do  ncr  am  05:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notable enough. Fairly large organization that goes far beyond the scope of UCLA. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:09, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:44, 21 April 2016 (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.