Talk:Circle Health
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | On 2 June 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Circle Health Ltd to Circle Health. The result of the discussion was moved. |
Requested move 2 June 2021
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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 14:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Circle Health Ltd → Circle Health – No reason to have Ltd in the article name, in common with other company articles. There is no clash or confusion that could be caused by the rename 10mmsocket (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
- agree - Rwendland (talk) 10:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
- Support per nom. we usually leave off the "Limited" unless needed for disambiguation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
COI tag (February 2022)
editIt looks like recent contributions, which added promotional content and removed critical content, might have been the work of somebody with a conflict of interest. That editor has been advised of both the COI and sockpuppetry policies. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi 10mmsocket - no conflict of interest; I'm a trade title journalist. (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- What’s the trade title? And is it funded by the private healthcare lobbying industry? Because that would represent a conflict of interest. (And would explain your edits to insert advert-like text into the lead and remove all the widely-reported critical comment from the lead.) Cambial — foliar❧ 21:15, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Secondary sources
editWe need WP:SECONDARY and reliable sources to establish that an award given to a company is at all notable. Wikipedia is not a promotional tool and an obscure award's own website does not establish content as encyclopaedic. Similarly, PR-oriented trade sites with chumbox-style articles are not a reliable source. Cambial — foliar❧ 18:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)