Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outpatient clinic (hospital department)

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. Has been completely rewritten yesterday; please renominate if still deemed problematic. Sandstein 10:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Outpatient clinic (hospital department)[edit]

From what I know, the etymology section (= basically all) of this article seems to be absolute nonsense, and is not at all supported by the given sources.

According to the article, "policlinic" is a more correct English word that just happens not to be used, while "polyclinic" (with a "y") is not given as the more widespread (or even mainstream) spelling variant, but as a mere homophone (meaning it would be etymologically unrelated, which is bollocks). Secondly, the article goes as far as declaring the English-language polyclinic a "false friend" of foreign-language polyclinics, which is bollocks, too.

While institutional settings, legal definitions and common usage obviously vary between countries and languages, a "polyclinic" basically is another name for a multi-discipline outpatient establishment (or health care center) that may or may not be attached to a hospital. See for example the Polyclinics in England article.

With the etymology section being beyond remedy, the single remaining lead sentence doesn't give a substantially different definition of the term than Clinic does. Neither does the disambiguation page give a single meaning of "polyclinic" that fundamentally diverges from Clinic#Large outpatient clinics ("polyclinics") so its mere existence is quite confusing and more misleading than helpful. --PanchoS (talk) 19:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. PanchoS (talk) 19:16, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this is really a dictionary article. Not really encyclopaedic content, nor much prospect of finding any. And the etymology is rubbish. Polyclinic is the UK is used - if at all - to denote something not attached to a hospital.Rathfelder (talk) 23:16, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We definitely need an article on the outpatient department of hospitals. This is an increasingly important part of hospitals and there are WP articles on this topic in many other languages. Just because this article so far only presents the definition of the term (and an explanation for non-native speakers why/that this is not called a polyclinic or policlinic in English) is no reason to delete it. If we delete it, we'll soon be back to the confusion that reigned before I moved the article to this unambiguous name. A non-native speaker will again soon start a new article called "polyclinic" or "policlinic" on either hospital outpatient departments or independent outpatient clinics and then someone else will soon start writing about the other topic in the same article.

Do you feel that the layout change I did just now helps?

The criticism voiced above about the explanation for non-native speakers and about the explanation of the differences between UK and US usage of the terms polyclinic/policlinic is unfair and very discouraging. It's very rare on Wikipedia that someone makes such a big effort to provide sources for information about UK/US differences and especially for information about etymology. Please show which piece of information you feel is not supported by a source instead of summarily dismissing all of this information as nonsense and rubbish, especially without a single fact or argument or source to back up such a strong claim. --Espoo (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Espoo: Please show which piece of information you feel is not supported by a source → None of this article is supported by any of the given sources. The single, etymologically specific source given clearly explains that policlinic and polyclinic are just different spellings of the same word, though attributed to the distinct-but-related Ancient Greek words πολύς (lit. "many") resp. πόλις (lit. "community of many" or "city").
While one or the other spelling may be prevalent in different English varieties due to different linguistic traditions, and while this may (or may not) coincide with different institutional forms of outpatient care, no way it can be inferred that the different spellings had distinct meanings per se to the point of being mere homophones.
There simply is no fundamental difference between outpatient establishments cohabited with an inpatient general hospital and those that are not. Regardless of whether this is the usual term for this specific type of establishment in a given country or not, both are correctly referred to as pol(i/y)clinics. --PanchoS (talk) 17:36, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment These are very different discussions - I don't think the dab should be thrown in here. Boleyn (talk) 09:33, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. In case we discuss that elsewhere, please transfer this comment: There's also a very clear need for the disambig page. It's simply incorrect to claim Neither does the disambiguation page give a single meaning of "polyclinic" that fundamentally diverges from Clinic#Large outpatient clinics ("polyclinics"). If you feel it's confusing and more misleading than helpful, please help to improve it. It clearly explains 4 distinct uses of the term. Use 3 is one example of use 2, but it's completely normal to have such an extra bullet point on disambig pages. Are you happier now with the changed layout? --Espoo (talk) 09:37, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete/redirect to clinic - this is really just a tendentious, dubiously sourced etymology that fails to justify why this should be a separate article to 'clinic'. The citations are in all but two cases deadlinks and all of them are etymologies rather than specialist dictionaries for the medical profession or guides to hospital working practices. The only link that really goes to anything is to Merriam-Webster, and even that doesn't cite any sources to show that people use the terms it says they use either. The content that is on here fails WP:OR. Blythwood (talk) 00:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, with a side-order of WP:TROUT for User:Espoo - and the nominator also deserves a small portion of trout for inadequate WP:BEFORE on the article's history. Until just over a year ago, the article was called Polyclinic, primarily describing a type of medical facility most commonly found in some non-English speaking countries but not making this latter point clear. At this point, User:Espoo moved the article to its present title, added an etymology section, merged most of the remaining contents to Clinic#Large outpatient clinics, leaving the article essentially as the nominator found it. We therefore need to preserve the article history up to February 2015, whatever else happens. For User:Espoo's benefit, I will add: if you move an article from one title to another and then find yourself moving almost all the pre-existing content to another article - you should probably have created an article under the new title instead. Also, don't leave the effectively new article sitting around for over a year as just a WP:DICDEF and an etymology section not directly related to the new title - it is effectively inviting deletion. Having said that, the topic may justify a standalone article separate from Clinic - User:Espoo seems to have started trying to write it since the discussion above but it still needs more work (and reliable sources). PWilkinson (talk) 13:28, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge and redirect - it makes sense to me as it stands at the moment, but it does seem to be a British English phrase. However, as a comparison I do note that Accident and Emergency (a British English phrase) redirects to Emergency department which has a section on the UK concept. Shritwod (talk) 11:29, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge later if needed as I certainly see no needs for deletion since this is an article for an acceptable subject. SwisterTwister talk 04:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 17:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep &ndsh; If this article could be changed so it reflects the info from its sources, I think it is good to go. CLCStudent (talk) 18:01, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The subject of this article is clearly notable, but I didn't think much of the content so I have almost completely rewritten the article, and I hope it now meets with your approval. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:18, 24 March 2016 (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.