Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clinical Transaction Repository EMR

: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 delete. — Aitias // discussion 14:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Clinical Transaction Repository EMR]]=

:{{la|Clinical Transaction Repository EMR}} ([{{fullurl:Clinical Transaction Repository EMR|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clinical Transaction Repository EMR}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Fails notability requirements, contains no references. See also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Clinical_Transaction_Repository by the same editor {{user|MarkMoffitt}} which was deleted shortly after this one was created. Basie (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC) Basie (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete I have absolutely no idea what it is about, not referrable to anything. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Ugh, what a horrible article, but the real issue is that this specific thing doesn't seem to be worth an encyclopedia article -- even if we pretended that the format of a specific (and uncommon) database record was WP:Notable. The important information about the concept is already at Electronic health record. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - Unfortunately I do (mostly) understand the article. However, the subject is a very specific and (from memory) theoretical way of managing electronic medical records and as such does not currently warrant its own article. If it were to be successfully implemented at multiple healthcare facilities using different software providers (and third-party evidence provided of such), then it might need a separate article. In the meantime it belongs in EHR. (By the way in my working life, EHR are not "uncommon" database records. Rather they are the majority.) Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Ah, I meant that the CTR approach was (at least) uncommon, not EHRs. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

: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.