Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Physicians Health Choice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. MBisanz talk 18:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Physicians Health Choice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find any evidence this was a notable insurance company and it's not mentioned at all at its successor's article (AARP#Health_insurance). The award it won was its sole claim to notability, and that does not appear to be a notable award, but rather an industry selection.

Opted against PROD as the company's predecessor was brought to and deleted at AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WellMed Medical Management) and felt this deserved discussion as well. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. StarM 03:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Logs: 2009-10 restored, 2009-10 G6
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.