Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acland Hospital

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. BJ^Talk 19:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Acland Hospital

Hospitals are no different from organizations they must pass WP:CORP. Nothing I can find anywhere gives this hospital notability. It can not be called notable because of those it was founded in memory of because notability is not inherited. (Although a mention in that persons bio may be appropriate. Being sold also does not create notability....I mean you have to be kidding! benjicharlton (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~* Delete~~ AS per my nomination... benjicharlton (talk) 15:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep reviewed my discussion based on the new information added to the article

Delete A hospital can be notable, but no evidence this one is. No inherent notability just because it is a hospital. Edison (talk) 19:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — A little research reveals that the building is designed by the leading Victorian architect Sir Thomas Graham Jackson and the notable patients include John Betjeman and C. S. Lewis. I have added this information with multiple references and believe this passes as a notable building as well as former nursing home and hospital. — 13:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If a pizzaria serves someone famous, they dont become notable. This is a run of the mill nursing home, and NN RogueNinja_talk 22:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually its not even "run of the mill"...it's closed.....benjicharlton (talk) 22:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable, no in-depth coverage of the hospital anywhere, only mentions. Brilliantine (talk) 08:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it is non-notable and despite being designed by someone famous and having famous former patients notability is not inherited. Jasynnash2 (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. Clearly not notable as a hospital. (Changed vote below.) Not convincingly notable as Acland Hospital building. A list of works by the architect belongs in and is in the article on the architect. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Looking at google books, there seems to be an entry on it on p. 6 of The Encyclopedia of Oxford, ed. Christopher Hibbert, London: Macmillan 1988, ISBN 033339917X (snippet only, so I don't know what it says). Mention in Pevsner (given in the article) also strongly suggests notability. As to famous people having stayed there (more candidates in Google books), the comparison with visits to a pizzeria is not appropriate (a serious biography will say what hospital its subject stayed at, not every restaurant they ate at). N p holmes (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Notable (1) a building by a notable architect (2) a nursing home that operated for 125 years. Even though it is now defunct, the article is worth keeping for its historic content. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable building, notable architect, notable history, sourced. --Bduke (Discussion) 00:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addition to sufficient rationale provided by Bduke (talk · contribs) and Peterkingiron (talk · contribs), it was relatively simple to find independent secondary sources which give significant discussion of the subject of this article. Cirt (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources? I hope you don't mind me asking. Brilliantine (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As "Sarah Acland Home for Nurses" - in Bristol Times And Mirror, April 19, 1897.

Canada Free Press, November 16, 2004.

Some additional book sources "Sarah Acland Home for Nurses", "Acland Hospital", "Acland Nursing Home", "Acland Home", hospital

The fact that there is an entry in The Encyclopedia of Oxford is also compelling.

There is enough info there in WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources to establish notability, not to mention also enough to get this article up to WP:GA status. Cirt (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford Encyclopedia entry I would say is not at all compelling. It has thousands and thousands of entries for what is essentially a pretty small city. Pretty much every street would be notable by that standard. I am still looking at the other sources, as Google Books is being very slow today. Brilliantine (talk) 22:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good, keep us posted. Cirt (talk) 22:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is unimportant now, I hope, since Cirt has updated the article, but Brilliantine's description of The Oxford Encyclopaedia is at odds with what the review in The Oxford Review of Education 16 (1990), 126 says "The Encyclopaedia comprises some 1000 entries" (accessible via JSTOR). Since these are on institutions, places and people as well as buildings, it ought not to be surprising that Oxford has more than a thousand notable subjects. N p holmes (talk) 10:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Please see changes made to the article incorporating further information from an additional (16) WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 05:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. (Changed vote.) Improved article shows clear notability. Good work Cirt! ~ Ningauble (talk) 12:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ningauble (talk · contribs), most appreciated. Cirt (talk) 17:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well done Cirt, thank you for all your interesting research. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 09:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks, it was a fun little expansion project. It was most interesting in the course of research to learn that George V of the United Kingdom officially opened the new buildings of the facility on May 12, 1879. Cirt (talk) 09:18, 14 September 2008 (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.