Talk:Hope Hospitals: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:49, 28 April 2013

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Hospitals Redirect‑class

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

India Redirect‑class

	India portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Contested change

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... this page simply explains what Hope hospitals is and how it is contributing towards the improvement of health care services in India. there is nothing promotional written on this page.Neutral C 07:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)18:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Objection to deletion

It is not true that Hope hospitals is a Non notable local hospital. The hospital is the first and only hospital in central india to have an international accreditation NABH which is considered equivalent to Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. It has won many awards, both national and international, for its quality initiatives. The hospital is the only yellow fever vaccination center in central india and is the only hospital to run the medical center at the International airport in Nagpur. The article has been improved, copyedited, sourced by various editors since 13 jan 2013. Hope hospital in Nagpur is multi speciality hospital which specialises in specialised surgeries and critical care. The description will definitely help patients and the public in general to choose the right hospital for quality patient care. The innovations of Hope have been recognised by Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Indo-US Science & Technology Forum, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry; Stanford Graduate School of Business and the IC2 Institute at the University of Texas. The newspapers from which the article is sourced are of national repute. If these achievements aren't notable enough, then what is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutral contributor (talk • contribs) 04:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC) Neutral contributor (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Contested change ' A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject.' & 'appears to be written like an advertisement.'

It is not true that the major contributor has a close connection with its subject. The article has been improved, copyedited, sourced by various editors since 13 jan 2013. The newspapers from which the article is sourced are of national repute. cleanup has been done by editors in the last three months to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. I did not find any content written in the article that appears to be written like an advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutral contributor (talk • contribs) 04:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Has it ? It still reads like a page designed to promote the hospital. LGA _talk^edits 04:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A substantial percentage of referenced information are deleted with no valid reason given in the summary. I dont think it is necessary. David Levii (talk) 04:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Contested change 'may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations' & ' None of these awards has own WP article and therefore is not notable and is promotional.'

Notability is already established by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. The awards may not have a WP article but the awards are mentioned in several articles in wikipedia. The newspapers sourced are of national repute : e.g.The times of india and The hitavada. Each of the the awards are of either international or national level. Various independent sources have been sourced. Hope is notable because it has been the subject of significant coverage in various secondary sources. Such sources are reliable, and independent of the subject.The sources that have significantly covered the awards and the hospital have their own WP articles.

Request for third opinions

Third opinions being an excellent venue for small disputes involving only two editors, I have requested some editors having interests in healthcare, hospitals and staying in Nagpur in noticeboards to contribute and join the discussion. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content if any from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. Neutral C 07:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutral contributor (talk • contribs)

Fixable and I shall fix it.I have already done some cleanup!117.203.124.105 (talk) 10:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Related SPI

Readers of this talk page should also visit : Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drbkmurali/Archive. LGA _talk^edits 22:36, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Over 230 edits seems to have been made painstakingly over a period of 4 months. The article has been improved, copyedited, sourced by various editors since 13 jan 2013. Copy edits for better readability, removal of weasel terms, verifiability etc. have been done. I find no reason to make a wiki page of a reputed hospital in Nagpur into a stub now! Notability is already established by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. The awards may not have a WP article but the awards are mentioned in several articles in wikipedia. Each of the the awards are of international repute. Such sources are reliable, and independent of the subject.The sources that have significantly covered the awards and the hospital have their own WP articles. The hospital is the first and only hospital in central india to have an international accreditation NABH which is considered equivalent to Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.The hospital is the only yellow fever vaccination center in central india and is the only hospital to run the medical center at the International airport in Nagpur. Hope hospital in Nagpur is multi speciality hospital which specialises in specialised surgeries and critical care. The innovations of Hope, especially DRMHope has been selected as top 50 innovations in India by Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Indo-US Science & Technology Forum, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry; Stanford Graduate School of Business and the IC2 Institute at the University of Texas. The newspapers e.g.'The times of india' and 'The hitavada' from which the article is sourced are of national repute. Hope is notable because it has been the subject of significant coverage in various secondary sources.Please refrain from making frequent reverts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbkmurali (talk • contribs) 08:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia."

Since Wikipedia does not have the same space limitations as a paper encyclopedia, there is no need to restrict content in the same way that a paper encyclopedia does. Usually the AFD discussion takes up the same or greater amount of disk space than the article. No performance problems result from having many articles . Inclusionists (see Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia)claim that authors should take a more open-minded look at content criteria. Articles on people, places, and concepts of little note may be perfectly acceptable for Wikipedia in this view. Some inclusionists do not see a problem with including pages which give a factual description of every person on Earth.I feel that since the original article sources are reliable, and independent of the subject, they should be reverted! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbkmurali (talk • contribs) 13:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC) It's easy to criticize and delete, whereas it's much more difficult to do research and create content. "Better to light a candle than curse the darkness." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbkmurali (talk • contribs) 14:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

conflict of interest

I am the founder. I have added a few reliable source to the article recently. The entire article is substantiated by reliable sources. The article Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations allows person with COI to edit an article on following the rules: "What rules should I follow while editing Wikipedia articles?' Verifiability: Content that is added must be published by a reliable source. This means a third-party source - for most content, your company website does not count as a source. You need to avoid original research. This means that information that is included must have been published by someone other than yourself (or your company).

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 Since Wikipedia does not have the same space limitations as a paper encyclopedia, there is no need to restrict content in the same way that a paper encyclopedia does. Usually the AFD discussion takes up the same or greater amount of disk space than the article. No performance problems result from having many articles . Inclusionists (see [[Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia]])claim that authors should take a more open-minded look at content criteria. Articles on people, places, and concepts of little note may be perfectly acceptable for Wikipedia in this view. Some inclusionists do not see a problem with including pages which give a factual description of every person on Earth.I feel that since the original article sources are reliable, and independent of the subject, they should be reverted!  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Drbkmurali|Drbkmurali]] ([[User talk:Drbkmurali|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Drbkmurali|contribs]]) 13:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 It's easy to criticize and delete, whereas it's much more difficult to do research and create content. "Better to light a candle than curse the darkness."  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Drbkmurali|Drbkmurali]] ([[User talk:Drbkmurali|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Drbkmurali|contribs]]) 14:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+==conflict of interest==
+I am the founder. I have added a few reliable source to the article recently. The entire article is substantiated by reliable sources. The article [[Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations]] allows person with COI to edit an article on following the rules:
+"What rules should I follow while editing Wikipedia articles?'
+Verifiability: Content that is added must be published by a reliable source. This means a third-party source - for most content, your company website does not count as a source. You need to avoid original research. This means that information that is included must have been published by someone other than yourself (or your company).