Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hospital de San Carlos

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. ‑Scottywong | communicate _ 16:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hospital de San Carlos

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:ORG. no evidence of significant coverage LibStar (talk) 23:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. AFD fails wp:BEFORE. Numerous hits in La Prensa Libre Costa Rica, in Diario de Cádiz, in other newspapers. Also, in general hospitals are going to be notable. To the nominator, please try to refrain from commenting on my opinion, merely to say you disagree with my opinion. --do ncr am 00:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the coverage is routine of what you'd expect in a hospital. There is no inherent notability in hospitals. Again WP:ITSNOTABLE. LibStar (talk) 00:47, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:49, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep Hospitals are major institutions in communities. I will try to add some content to the article this week. Knox490 (talk) 02:04, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added material to the article. Knox490 (talk) 06:08, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

there is no inherent notability of hospitals. LibStar (talk) 02:06, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) ~~Neutral, but WP:AGF so Weak Keep~~Delete - however, keeping the general (WP:GNG) and specific (WP:NHOSPITALS) guidelines in mind, the article should not exist solely because the hospital exists - if there is press coverage (beyond routine "the victims were transported to ...") then it should be kept, otherwise it's not necessary to waste the time of Wikipedia editors on improving an article that can't be improved. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 02:37, 12 April 2017 (UTC) opinion changed based on new info, 11:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per this source, a whole chapter, and an entire book about this hospital. SL93 (talk) 02:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- These sources appear to be about a now closed hospital with the same name that is notable. It shouldn't be too hard to replace the end of the article's only sentence. SL93 (talk) 02:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note from somebody who understands Spanish (to some extant) - the above source, on page 514, talking about a psychiatrist who worked there, says that it is "[el] viejo Hospital de San Carlos", that is, the OLD Hospital of San Carlos, which confirms what SL93 says. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 02:51, 12 April 2017 (UTC) Looking at the table of contents, I conclude the same thing (sorry for the repeated edits). 02:54, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine. Thanks for the help. SL93 (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SL93, assuming that they are related, like the "new" hospital is the successor of the "old" one, this article should be about both. It is routine to cover the organization and the older and current buildings of the organization, for organizations like churches and schools and hospitals, in one article at the common name (or the most recent name). --do ncr am 03:31, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks notability. For all we know it could be a small medical practice. Fatty wawa (talk) 04:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It seems clear that the old hospital has had significant coverage and the new hospital is a continuation of the old. I don't see why we shouldn't have an article about the old one (clearly it passes GNG), and it seems verifiable that the new is a continuation of the old. Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

as explained below the coverage found refers to a different hospital. LibStar (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, you are right that the coverage refers to a different hospital, but not the one discussed below. There is a hospital in Quesada, Alajueda, Costa Rica with this name. There is also a hospital in Ñiquén, Chile, es:Hospital de San Carlos (Chile), with the history added by Knox490. A few more hospitals with similar names can be found at es:Hospital de San Carlos. I don't see why both of these hospitals wouldn't be notable - google news search of the hospital name and (either) city give lots of routine coverage and likely could give something deeper. I'd be happy to restore my !vote if this were cleaned up, but I am striking for now. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Per Smmmurphy. L3X1 (distant write) 21:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

not a genuine argument as per WP:PERX. LibStar (talk) 17:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned page says, if the endorsed comment has a solid grounding in policy, then yes it's okay to simply endorse it. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 11:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What WBGodric has to say about PERNOM. L3X1 (distant write) 04:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@L3X1: since Smmurphy has changed his/her vote, you would no longer support keep too. LibStar (talk) 04:37, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

!vote struck. L3X1 (distant write) 15:43, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 16:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete what the hell is wrong with people? This page is about a hospital in Costa Rica. this source and this source and this source cited above (the last two of which are volume 1 and volume 2 by the same author, not a chapter and a book) are about a hospital with this name in Spain. The title of the first ref is "Constructing Spain: The Re-imagination of Space and Place in Fiction and Film, 1953-2003", for pete's sake so you cannot even claim the Spanish language problem. It is really despicable for people to just grab some ref that mentions the word X and claim a Wikipedia page about some specific X is notable. This page is another uncited Dr Blofeld special and fails GNG by miles. Jytdog (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - never bothered to look for that, I just assumed good faith. Though, here, the mentioned source does mention (with dates corresponding to the Spanish Civil War) a civil war, so that's it - changed my vote to delete, thus. 69.165.196.103 (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Yeah, bit confusing, but there doesn't seem to be enough coverage of the subject of this article to show that it passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.