Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medicaid Information Technology Architecture

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. Sam Walton (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Medicaid Information Technology Architecture

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

Unreferenced & promotional Rathfelder (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No independent references cited, and none found. I wondered about a redirect to Medicaid, but this subject is not mentioned there and there is no information worth merging. --MelanieN (talk) 01:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as stand alone, not notable and redirect to main subject article. Kierzek (talk) 14:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TNT at best because I found several links at News, Books, browser and Highbeam but nothing to suggest better immediate improvement. SwisterTwister talk 07:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is an agency initiative that may have significant interest in the industry, but little notability outside of that. At best, it merits a mention in an article on medical recordkeeping or industry standards for such things.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 00:39, 5 October 2015 (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.