Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Govt ENT Hospital

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. Participation in this debate was rather poor and there also seem to be some misunderstandings (i.e., a "delete" !vote per someone who seemed to be arguing for "keep"). Therefore no prejudice to re-nomination in a month or so if better sourcing is not forthcoming. Randykitty (talk) 14:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Govt ENT Hospital[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Both sources mentioned in the article fail WP:ORGDEPTH - they discuss a lack of suregeons at the hospital, but not much in depth information about the hospital (year of founding, etc.). Same goes for the sources I could find when searching on Google. MrClog (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

comment: The hospital serves throat deceases, and also serves patents. These are really remarkable feats. I mean, how many other hospitals serve patents, or try to cure E/N/T problems of deceased people? —usernamekiran(talk) 21:14, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article is pretty rudimentary. I'm not even sure if the name of the hospital is accurate. But it would be very surprising if a public hospital of this size was not notable, and there seems to be plenty of coverage of it in reputable sources. Rathfelder (talk) 22:10, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't been able to find any WP:ORGDEPTH stuff. If the hospital really has a different name, that may explain it. --MrClog (talk) 23:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is almost impossible to find detailed coverage of any hospital. They are too complicated. It have to be pieced together over time. Rathfelder (talk) 14:42, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If there aren't sources meeting ORGDEPTH yet, then the article should be deleted and recreated once these sources exist. --MrClog (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further consensus needed at this stage to decide an outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven Crossin ^{Help resolve disputes!} 01:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Scott Burley (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

delete - per Rathfelder. The article lacks significant coverage. We cant even be sure of the name. The hospital fails general notability criteria, as well as specialised notability criteria. —usernamekiran(talk) 15:58, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Usernamekiran, I believe Rathfelder is arguing against deletion, but I am not sure. --MrClog (talk) 12:36, 15 August 2019 (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.