Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hospitals

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 About Talk Participants Tutorials Maintenance Articles Assessments Popular pages 
WikiProject iconHospitals Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

hospital pages for AtlantiCare hospitals (New Jersey) need attention

Please see a proposed split discussion here

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rajah Muthiah Medical College#Requested move 3 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Trinity Health (Livonia, Michigan)#Requested move 10 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 02:23, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removing a DAB link from infobox

Hospital for Special Surgery currently has a DAB link to "Hospitals in New York" in the infobox that doesn't show up in the code, so is it programmed elsewhere to appear there automatically? Should a DAB be there? — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The wikilink seems to be automatically added by the infobox Template:Infobox hospital/lists based on the region coding in it. In particular what's currently header 52 and label 54. It partly relies on the subtemplate Template:Infobox hospital/lists. I agree linking to the disambiguation page List of hospitals in New York doesn't make much sense and will see if I can get someone to update the lists subtemplate. Nil Einne (talk) 13:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great Ormond Street Hospital

This project looks fairly inactivate, however if there is anyone paying attention, Great Ormond Street Hospital currently rated as high importance, looks like it may need some work. [1] In particular, it seems to have become a classic example of the problem with controversy sections as the section seems to have become a dumping ground for anything critical the media once reported that someone cared enough to add. Heck a whole bunch of stuff start with "it was revealed". From what they say, it seems unlikely all of these have long term significance. Nil Einne (talk) 13:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]