Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NHS National Workforce Projects

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NHS National Workforce Projects

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Failed prod. Non notable defunct organisation, no references Waggers TALK 08:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Organizations, and England. Waggers TALK 08:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: An article on a project team within an (admittedly large and complex) organisation which, as with any such team, had its place in the org structure of the time but was then reorged. I had thought searches in likely places such as the Guardian site would find comment at the points of creation or dissolution but have not found anything. That leaves the secondary question of whether there might be an alternative redirect target? AllyD (talk) 05:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Having looked again in the absence of others' suggestions, History_of_the_National_Health_Service_(England)#Blair_government_reforms could perhaps be a merge/redirect target, however as any text merging would probably be disproportionate coverage of one project team, and there remains a lack of sourcing, I am inclined towards deletion as the better outcome. AllyD (talk) 08:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Defunct, non-notable and sourceless. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 07:24, 30 June 2023 (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.