Talk:NHS Nightingale Hospital London

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose to merge NHS Nightingale into Nightingale Hospital (ExCeL). They cover the same subject, and this article follows the naming systems of other UK hospital articles. PotentPotables (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

merger is all done, thanks to those who helped! PotentPotables (talk) 18:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @PotentPotables: This is because NHS hospitals are invariably run by a NHS trust. This one was announced by the central government and is being staffed by the miliary. It is a national hospital to deal with a particular demand, so inappropriate to begin with a local name like 'Withington'). It is the 'exception that proves the rule', so to speak. jamacfarlane (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Reviewed, thank you for your contributions :).

SITH (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 March 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: RESULT: Not moved. SNOW close as the other proposal has more support (non-admin closure) Joseph2302 (talk) 11:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Nightingale Hospital (ExCeL) → Nightingale Hospital (temporary NHS facility) – More descriptive Klock85 (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the current name fits in with WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSISTENT, as other UK hospitals with the same name are defined by their location, see Alexandra Hospital (Cheadle) and Alexandra Hospital (Redditch). Only one is an NHS hospital, but I think it would be consistent to keep the defining through location. Whether the ExCeL would technically count as its location might be a different matter, but that seems to be where most sources are describing it (as opposed to Newham). PotentPotables (talk) 20:17, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Against for now. I believe the current title is accurate, but when it does close believe it should change to reflect its nature. For now we have no idea exactly how long it will be open and operating for. Also Nightingale Hospital is a current hospital in central London. [1] CH7i5 (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.nhs.uk/Services/hospitals/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=95883
Oppose: I understand the official title is NHS Nightingale Hospital, so it should be mvoed to that if anything. This is Paul (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: This is a clumsy disambiguation. Support "NHS Nightingale Hospital" as proposed by Paul. jamacfarlane (talk) 21:36, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Support "NHS Nightingale Hospital" instead. Dormskirk (talk) 23:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; should be moved to official name "NHS Nightingale Hospital", per proposal below. -- The Anome (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per COMMONNAME. ——SN54129 09:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 24 March 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOVED per WP:SNOW, given unanimous support for this, both here and in the discussion above The Anome (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nightingale Hospital (ExCeL) → NHS Nightingale Hospital – Using official name of hospital[1] so "(Excel)" isn't needed. jamacfarlane (talk) 21:35, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "10 Downing Street".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  • Support: This is the official title. However, I don't know how things stand with another move discussion already under way. Maybe that one has to be closed first, I don't know. This is Paul (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Ejosm: has moved the page without the discussions going ahead properly to a different name than suggested, so I'm not sure what happens now? PotentPotables (talk) 22:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New NHS Nightingale Hospitals[edit]

Should this article include the new converted hospitals, also called NHS Nightingale, being set up in Birmingham and Manchester? Kingsif (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should, Kingsif, unless/until they become notable in their own right. I hesitate to suggest it—considering the multiple moves and RfCs already gone through for this small page!—but if it was moved to NHS Nightingale Hospitals, it could cover them all as a broad topic. ——SN54129 17:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that - it should be enough of an uncontroversial move to be BOLD, but understnad if you're hesitant on that. Kingsif (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think so, and named "NHS Nightingale Hospitals". -- DeFacto (talk). 18:03, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Considering they probably aren't going to get individual names, due to their temporary nature, and that each aren't currently notable on their own. I would agree with moving to NHS Nightingale Hospitals. 195.213.0.186 (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
FYI The front door of the ExCeL is calling it NHS Nightingale Hospital London (see https://twitter.com/AmandeepBhogal/status/1243260337404739585). If that's the official name then this article should be moved (yet again), the current name should be a disambiguation page and NHS Nightingale Hospital Birmingham and NHS Nightingale Hospital Manchester should be created. 2A02:C7D:118C:2600:DA6:61C6:CD9F:FD46 (talk) 22:20, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we need separate articles for all these make shift hospitals, so I support moving this to the plural, and covering the other makeshift hospitals here too. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:23, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done: renamed to "NHS Nightingale Hospitals" as it seemed to be uncontroversial. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Anome: please revert your move; we've had multiple move discussions on this page, which you are welcome to join. ——SN54129 11:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Moving it back to NHS Nightingale Hospital, the last article title it was moved to by a discussion. -- The Anome (talk) 11:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@The Anome: Many thanks. Having said that...I'm afraid I hadn't seen your new page for the overall topic when I wrote that. It's actually a good idea, which, if it had been considered in one of the above mentioned move discussions, but have been popular. So now I'm flapping! Sorry. ——SN54129 11:54, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129: Thanks. Just for clarity, the new article about the hospital network is now at NHS coronavirus field hospitals. But there certainly can't be any doubt that each hospital will be independently notable: NHS Nightingale London is already the country's largest planned hospital. Can you please file a requested move for this article to be moved to NHS Nightingale Hospital London? -- The Anome (talk) 12:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The umbrella article should be called "NHS Nightingale Hospitals", as that is what they are, and it's consistent. -- DeFacto (talk). 12:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 March 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved without the comma. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


NHS Nightingale Hospital → NHS Nightingale Hospital, London – Official name, per this NHS page, and the photo of the entrance in this article -- The Anome (talk) 12:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Makes sense to me. Dormskirk (talk) 13:03, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my vacilation above; I'm guessing that had this been a suggestion in the above move discussion(s) it would have been a favored outcome. The poor article has now moved move times than the Burkina Faso Disputed Zone; hopefuly this will settle it once and for all  :) ——SN54129 13:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support as there's going to be at least two other hospitals established with this name. This is Paul (talk) 13:25, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've created redirects for the other two, both with and without commas between the hospital name and city. This is Paul (talk) 13:27, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (with comma) as that source is only 4 days old, and the idea of others around the country isn't mentioned in it. Support NHS Nightingale Hospital London (no comma) for this one, which is not inconsistent with the new signage on the entrance (see here). -- DeFacto (talk). 13:33, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @DeFacto, Serial Number 54129, and Dormskirk: I'd be happy with this article being moved to either version, with or without comma, with the other becoming a redirect. Would everyone be happy witha move to NHS Nightingale Hospital London, and a redirect at NHS Nightingale Hospital, London? -- The Anome (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Fine with me with or without the comma. Dormskirk (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose: I think having an article per hospital is excessive - this one can cover all three hospitals. I also oppose moving to "NHS Nightingale Hospitals" because Wikipedia articles should use the WP:singular form. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're misinterpreting singular form. Here, there are multiple physical hospitals, this isn't abstract like discussing a horse. I would suggest having a lower-case 'h' for 'hospitals' to perhaps clarify. Kingsif (talk) 15:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I take your point but would still prefer the singular. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the current NHS Nightingale Hospitals can be moved to "NHS Nightingale Hospital" just as soon as this article is moved to NHS Nightingale Hospital London (or NHS Nightingale Hospital, London, doesn't matter which.). Where's WP:IAR where it's needed? -- The Anome (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jamacfarlane: How do you feel about this now? You're the only one opposing the move, as the other two are just about a comma or not. BaldBoris 18:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My opposition is really to the number of pages - one for all UK "Covid" hospitals, one for the English "Nightingale" ones, and one for each of the (15?) individual hospitals - but it looks like editors have put enough effort in to produce decent length articles, so I am content to withdraw my opposition. jamacfarlane (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the 2nd source seems to use "NHS Nightingale Hospital London" (without the comma indicating its part of the name) while the 1st source seems to include that ", London" is just being provided for context rather than being part of the name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I support no comma per below. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support
n.b., the current redirects are :
SUPPORT move to :
the building is 1 km long, ("You're gonna need a bigger boat")
and with new redirects:
—§—T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 19:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@T3g5JZ50GLq: Its official website nightingale-london.nhs.uk uses "NHS Nightingale Hospital London © 2020" in the footer. BaldBoris 18:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support but strongly support without comma i.e. support a move to NHS Nightingale Hospital London per NHS Professionals website at https://www.nhsprofessionals.nhs.uk/nightingale and avoiding ambiguity per WP:PRECISE. ArcMachaon (talk) 00:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support without comma. The hospital has now been officially opened under the name NHS Nightingale Hospital London. See [1]. 2A02:C7D:118C:2600:6856:146C:AE68:9259 (talk) 11:54, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on comma[edit]

Creating this section for the issue of whether the title should have a comma before "London". Discussion here is on the assumption that the article title should contain "London".

  • Comment: The link given by The Anome uses both "NHS Nightingale Hospital, London" and "NHS Nightingale London". The signage on the building uses "NHS|Nightingale Hospital|London" (i.e. over three lines).jamacfarlane (talk) 20:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge — whilst the individual hospitals may well be individually notable, each of them are almost certainly going to have the same content about each one leading to duplication; it makes more sense to have one consolidated article with the common content at the top and any hospital-specific content underneath. If it transpires that there becomes a justification for any given hospital to have its own individual page it can be created separately then and linked to from the umbrella page in the usual manner Star-one (talk) 13:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use comma
search: "Nightingale Hospital London" site:nhs.uk (filter=0) yields 41 results
  • 24 Nightingale Hospital London
  • 17 Nightingale Hospital, London
  • Letter Templates use Nightingale Hospital, London
—§—T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 01:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

What we should end up with IMO is the content and history of this page at NHS Nightingale Hospital London (or with a comma, personally prefer without but not because that's the official name) and the content and history now at NHS Nightingale Hospitals at NHS Nightingale Hospital. Both articles have good content and significant history which needs to be preserved. Andrewa (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewa: Agree. Can you please do it now as I believe this and the proposed merge below have reached their end now. BaldBoris 13:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm arguably involved now but it will hopefully happen soon. Andrewa (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed merge of NHS Nightingale Hospitals into NHS Nightingale Hospital[edit]

I feel this is an absolute mess. We have two very short articles on the same topic - one about the the "NHSN" hospital in London, and one about the concept of NHSN hospitals. It looks as it there are going to be at least four of these temporary hospitals. I don't think we need a separate article for each. I feel this topic could be covered by a single article "NHS Nightingale Hospital" (singular, as article titles usually use the singular form) with a section with details on each individual hospital. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:30, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should all be in one article, but please read Wikipedia:SINGULAR carefully. NHS Nightingale hospitals should be fine. I might just be bold and move it there, because this is a mess. Kingsif (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't, until there is consensus. The official name (at least of the London one) includes "Hospital" with a capital H. Plus, using "hospital" would be inconsistent with other article titles. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:37, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No, really please don't. We have articles on small hospitals all over the UK; to say that what are likely to become the three largest hospitals in the entire country are not independently notable is just not supported by policy. There is likely to be a lot more to say about these hospitals over the next few weeks, as they start to take the load of dealing with the largest ever health crisis in a century, something which is likely to play out differently in each area. -- The Anome (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and don't merge Please don't, yet. A similar example is our Type 45 destroyer as an umbrella article for the individual ships (Daring, Dauntless, etc). ——SN54129 16:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129: added "don't merge" in front of the three preceding comments. I'm sure this was an innocent misinterpretation of them. "Please don't" refers to Kingsif's proposal to "be bold" and move the page to a lower case 'h' without waiting for consensus. jamacfarlane (talk) 20:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mergeright now, no evidence that any of them agree going to be independently significant, the two articles right now are so similar, and I expect it to stay that way. If one of them gets excessive news coverage in the future, that would be the time to split it. But for now, anything more than one article (which itself is short anyway) is excessive. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't merge: These are going to be three of the largest hospitals in the country and no doubt we'll hear much about them in the coming months. This is Paul (talk) 17:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge back to how it was this morning (as NHS Nightingale Hospitals), before all the undiscussed splitting and renaming, as only one such hospital exists up to now. If/when they become notable would be the time to create separate articles. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC) Struck out per my change of mind following further developments and my now oppose preference added below. -- DeFacto (talk). 09:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That can't happen unfortunately, as of course the page moves were the result of (multiple) consensus. ——SN54129 18:36, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Serial Number 54129: where is the consensus to split out an article about the London hospital? There is a consensus above at #New NHS Nightingale Hospitals to cover them all in single article named in the plural. -- DeFacto (talk). 18:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, no consensus to split these articles or move them all around so much. Merge them back together at the last agreed name, and then move protect everything to stop these stupid shenanigans. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Joseph2302:, agf, etc :p ——SN54129 13:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 01:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC), refactored 02:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC) due to being taken over by events[reply]
  • Oppose. I think that this merge request has been overtaken by events. The deletion discussion on the NHS Nightingale Hospitals has been closed as "keep", that article is developing to cover the progress of the several NHS Hospitals being constructed, and we now have an article for the new NHS Nightingale Hospital Birmingham. And as this article has developed following the opening of the London hospital to cover that and its acceptance of patients, perhaps it's time now to close this discussion, and concentrate on the move discussion above, and hopefully rename this article per its content as "NHS Nightingale Hospital London". -- DeFacto (talk). 09:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose merger for the reasons stated above. Please see Talk:NHS Nightingale Hospitals however. This is fine as a standalone article about the Excel site which is clearly notable in its own right. However we need to discuss how to cover the UK-wide Nightingale scheme. NHS Nightingale Hospitals on the face of it sounds like a UK wide article but actually only covers England. Meanwhile NHS COVID-19 critical care hospitals covers the whole of the UK. I'd suggest merging NHS Nightingale Hospitals and NHS COVID-19 critical care hospitals but have started a discussion over at Talk:NHS Nightingale Hospitals on this, contributions appreciated.

Requested move on umbrella article[edit]

I've put in a move request on the umbrella article, from its current title NHS Nightingale Hospitals to a new title, NHS COVID-19 critical care hospitals, that should hopefully help with the endless article renaming saga. There are five of these planned hospitals, and this is a much bigger project overall than even the huge NHSN hospital in London. -- The Anome (talk) 18:12, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant AFD[edit]

The related article NHS Nightingale Hospitals has an AfD here. Please feel free to contribute. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that delete nomination was a really bad idea. Good content and significant history. Hopefully that will be closed asap! Andrewa (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And it was Closed as keep. [3] Closer noted that there were strong arguments for a merge.

So I can't reply there to this rather confused post with the edit summary Try to clarify situation. I assume good faith but it was a very poor attempt.

It included for example the claim The question is rather: is there justification for a separate article on the England-only effort (NHS Nightingale Hospitals), or should it be covered as part of the UK-wide article (NHS COVID-19 critical care hospitals)? Hence the Merge !votes above. (their emphasis) No, that's a matter for a merge discussion, as suggested by many including myself and the closer. A merge preserves the content, and also the history without which the content cannot be kept, otherwise we would be in breach of copyleft. Deletion removes both the content and the history, and therefore also removes the right to reuse the content anywhere.

I say again, the deletion proposal was completely without merit. Andrewa (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Access-date on news cites[edit]

Moved here from my talkpage. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - You reverted my edit about access dates with an edit summary. I have re-read WP:ACCESSDATE. From my reading it specifically says "access date is not required for links to copies of published research papers accessed via DOI or a published book but should be used for links to news articles". I cannot see "Access dates are not required for... or news articles with publication dates." Please can you point me to the bit that you are referring to? Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 15:29, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dormskirk: as I said in my last edit summary, I was going by the documentation in Template:Cite news, which says: Access dates are not required for... or news articles with publication dates. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:44, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. But I think you will find wikipedia's guidelines have priority over a mere template. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 15:47, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Combine BOT tags?[edit]

Hi Keith D, did this edit achieve the change described in its edit summary? All I see is two lines being removed. -- DeFacto (talk). 07:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes it did achieve what I intended of the edit, which is to have only 1 set of the tags rather than 2 sets of tags that this article had before the edit. May be combine is not a good edit summary possibly consolidate is better? Keith D (talk) 10:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Keith D: oh yes! I didn't spot those others - thanks. -- DeFacto (talk). 10:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of nursing staff[edit]

I've restored my comment about patients being turned away because of lack of nursing staff: see [4], [5], [6] for sources. -- The Anome (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Anome: your edit summary says: "summary is entirely accurate". the Summary I referred to in my revert, and I assume you meant, said: "On April 21, it was reported that patients had had to be turned away from the hospital because of lack of nursing cover." Did you read the source you used to support that? I read it, and that was certainly not a fair summary in my view. It didn't cover the actual facts presented in the source (it just parroted the sensationalist headline) and it did not cover the explanations given for not accepting (they were never "turned away") certain patients and it did not cover the strong rebuttals of the accusations in the source. We have a duty to provide neutral coverage, this was not a neutral presentation of the content of the source. -- DeFacto (talk). 14:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is simple English comprehension. From the cited article:

[7]. So: (a) patients were rejected (i.e. "turned away"), because of a lack of staff (i.e. "because of a lack of staff"). I will restore the edit again, this time with a verbatim quote. Please let me know if you disagree with this. -- The Anome (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Anome: my question still stands - did you read the source you cited? If you did, why did you only include the unsubstantiated allegation without balancing it with the comprehensive rebuttal? Have you seen WP:NPOV? -- DeFacto (talk). 21:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You'll see that my latest version includes both, per WP:NPOV. -- The Anome (talk) 11:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:NHS_Nightingale_Hospital_London&oldid=1207211589"