Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Healthcare Success Strategies Inc

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. Hopelessly Promotional. Had I seen it earlier, possibly a G11 DGG ( talk ) 19:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Healthcare Success Strategies Inc

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

Article created by WP:SPA, with primary function of WP:ADVERT and WP:PROMO. — Cirt (talk) 06:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — Cirt (talk) 06:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete - this is an actual textbook WP:PROMO complete with "scare the consumer" call-out WSJ quotes from articles that have never mention the actual subject. The company has a brief mention in one article and no other established notability. EBY (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article is well referenced and I have found some more references on a Google search that can be used as well. However the article needs thorough rewriting to clean up the promoting materials. - Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 13:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The company has been covered on several big medical news websites and you can review the same at http://www.healthcaresuccess.com/about/press so I don't think there is any notability issue with the company. However, I would welcome people to remove the promotional part (if Any) from the page. - Andrew (Talk) 18.34, 29 October 2014 (UTC) — Andrewjohn39 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete after some consideration. I see very few independent references to suggest notability and there appears to be a COI here. Deb (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as passing WP:GNG. VMS Mosaic (talk) 05:31, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:GNG may be debatable but the copy definitely has the primary function of WP:ADVERT and WP:PROMO as the nominator stated. It also appears to violate WP:COS Spellsgood (talk) 22:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It should be noted that the advert tag was removed from the article without a consensus. Spellsgood (talk) 22:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as passing WP:GNG and includes many notable mentions elsewhere from broad but specific medical publications to suggest authority. sjsuarez (talk) 02:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC) — sjsuarez (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:46, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:CORP; I could not find any independent sourcing at all. The article's references are mostly self-referential - press releases or the company's own website. --MelanieN (talk) 02:30, 20 November 2014 (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.