Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Partial hospitalization

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 keep. Due to lack of a deletion reason/the problem being resolvable without deletion. @Interstellarity:, if there are copyright concerns listing the article at WP:CP would be the best course of action. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Partial hospitalization[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)

This is just copied and pasted. None of this is paraphrased. Interstellarity T 🌟 13:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This version of the article was not. Always check the edit history. Uncle G (talk) 14:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Uncle G: Should I let the nomination run or withdraw this nomination? Interstellarity T 🌟 15:15, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - That really depends from whether you want an administrator to hit the delete button and erase (from view) both the current article and its entire edit history. Because that's what AFD is for.
    If you think that there's no possibility for an article, because there's no such subject or no properly researched and published knowledge of it, then keep going. If the problem was merely with the text in a few recent versions of the article, and not what it looked like for the decade prior to that, then that's something that you (and even people without acccounts) possess the tools for fixing yourself. You could revert. Better, you could revert and then try to improve upon the older text, having researched the subject and found good sources to work from.
    I suggest at this point that you go and look to see whether this is a properly documented subject, by looking for good documentation (including but not limited to any cited in the article) and reading and evaluating it; decide based upon what you find which of these two courses is the appropriate one; and then come back with your conclusion. Once one gets beyond Wikignoming, this is what (our kind of) encyclopaedists do. They find good sources, read and understand them, evaluate their provenances and depths, and write free-content prose. For an AFD nomination and subsequent discussion, the first three apply; although some do the fourth as well, to prove the point.
    Uncle G (talk) 16:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Uncle G: What do you think is the best course of action at this point? Interstellarity T 🌟 17:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. CThomas³ (talk) 06:56, 19 June 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.