Talk:Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti

Request move

Names are nouns and are not translated to English. The accent also should not matter in search engines as long as you type specifically. I think it is more appropriate for the title to read: Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti Savvyjack23 (talk) 08:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Savvyjack23 (talk) 00:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hôpital Albert Schweitzer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100612202859/http://www2.tulane.edu/feature_haiti_1.cfm to http://www2.tulane.edu/feature_haiti_1.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Merge and repairs

So obviously fans or employees of the hospital in Haiti hijacked this article and turned it into their webpage. They also usurped the article name, which if anything should be for the original hospital in Africa.

I have merged the article for the Gabon hospital here and removed the unsourced advertising. Still working on making this an actual WP article. Jytdog (talk) 21:59, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Next steps

The following discussion 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.

---

So as mentioned above, I merged Albert Schweitzer Hospital here, following the process in WP:MERGETEXT.

An argument was made at my Talk page that we should keep the two WP articles separate like French WP does. Those articles are here:

• fr:Hôpital Albert-Schweitzer
• fr:Hôpital Albert-Schweitzer Haïti

It was also noted that portugese WP has an article about a similarly named hospital in Rio de Janiero (pt:Hospital Estadual Albert Schweitzer) but it is unclear to me if this hospital is actually in the tradition of the other two, or just a hospital that was named after Schweitzer. It is also just a stub in any case.

The two french articles are stubs, and are not the basis for an argument that there are vast articles that could be immediately created which ~should~ stand alone.

The following are facts: the original hospital and the Haitian one are solidly in one tradition, have the same mission and challenges, and have been supported by the same international organizations (the fellowships). Sources about the Haitian hospital almost always discuss its relationship to the original hospital. So ... I don't see any reason, based on WPs policies and guidelines, why they should be separate articles and no argument has been given for that, content-wise. I am very open to hearing such arguments, however. And if content about either or both hospitals was validly expanded based on RS such that a SPLIT was required, that too would make sense. Jytdog (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Jytdog both hospitals albeit the name, were founded by different people. The original by Schweitzer (Gabon) himself and the latter by Dr. Larry and Gwen Mellon as a tribute to Schweitzer. They do not own or operate the former, therefore cannot be an extension of. [1] If this was the same hospital (network) founded by Schweitzer, why doesn't it simply state that Mellon opened up a branch or extension in Haiti? In this source [2] Dr. Mellon writes to Schweitzer for advice on how to emulate his work in Gabon which he was so moved by that led him to opening a hospital where he thought was most needed next. (This research took minimal time).

It is worth mentioning that Gabon has filed for unesco status "Ancien Hôpital Albert Schweitzer de Lambaréné". (Former Albert Schweitzer Hospital of Lambaréné). Here's a museum of the "former" hospital. here French wikipedia says the hospital was relocated in 1927 and can see that it was rebuilt in 1981. [3] Anyway, this source describes the hospital as Hôpital Albert Schweitzer de Lambaréné. This source uses Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Lambaréné, Gabon) and mentiones other names. [4] Even though Gabon's hospital was founded first, it would not satisfy WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as the hospital in Haiti is more known, having more coverage and pertaining sources even before the 2010 Haiti earthquake in a quick search. ([5])

There is also a hospital in Colmar, France. [6].

Instead of debating PRIMARYTOPIC (which looks like we will be heading), let's make Hôpital Albert Schweitzer a disambiguous page. There are now 4 hospitals; all unrelated other than honoring Schweitzer in name. Also, it isn't certain that Haiti is part of the hospital's name either, as their acronym is HAS (opposed to HASH). [7] [8] My opening discussion in 2014 to include Haiti (without the parentheses) in a near requested move may have been premature. Although, their website includes a Copyright 2017 Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti [9] they're operating as Hôpital Albert Schweitzer. [10] Also, any mention of Pittsburgh on the web is due to the fact that Mellon was a Pittsburgh native. I believe they have an office where they can be reached using a Pittsburgh area code; worth mentioning that it is not a possible 5th hospital with the same name. [11] There is also a charity called Canadian Friends of Hopital Albert Schweitzer that makes contributions to the hospital in Haiti and not in Gabon. [12] Also a Swiss Schweizer Partnerschaft Hôpital Albert Schweizer Haiti [13] (-Haiti extension used here)

As mentioned, there are no sources that indicate these are run together or incorporated with each other. (Hospital in Haiti is a non-for-profit privately regulated) Gabon's hospital is a non-profit government regulated run by the fondation internationale de l'hopital du dr albert schweitzer which is included in this article. [14] The Schweitzer Foundation maintains links to organizations that further Dr. Schweitzer's legacy. About Haiti's hospital in connection to Gabon's it says:

The Community Health Program of HAS-Haiti was a model for ASF’s efforts in the 1990s to establish a greatly-expanded Community Health Program at the Schweitzer Hospital in Lambaréné. The two Hospitals maintain a close sister-hospital relationship, bridging their trans-Atlantic separation. [15]

The Mellons simply decided one day they could do some good in the world and named their hospital after someone who inspired them, as others have offered their tributes around the world. [16] Hence, different hospitals, different articles yet with a common goal and inspirer.

Commons:Category:Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Lambaréné may need a rename soon too. Sorry for the belated response; chose to enjoy the weekend. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes as the article says, they were founded by different people. The article makes that clear and I never wrote that they were founded by the same people or were the same actual organization - I said they are in the same tradition and are supported by the same institutions - namely the fellowships around the world (e.g the US chapter supports the Haiti hospital (source) as well as continuing to support the Gabon hospital (source). Same thing for the UK group, which supports both the Gabon hospital (ref) and Haiti (source). This discussion is going to go no where, if you continue to misrepresent what I have written. Jytdog (talk) 05:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Jytdog you are misconstruing the sources you state. In this source, in a derivative link [17] states that the UK fund found out about Haiti's hospital in 1994, far from when the hosital was founded (1954). Furthermore, these "other" chapters in the source that you mentioned [18] include other hospitals that don't even bare the same name; so would you go as far as adding them to this article as well? Plus these hospitals aren't even chapters of the Hôpital Albert Schweitzer they are chapters of the Dr. Schweitzer's Hospital Fund. This is clearly a controversial merge to begin with (as you have opposition) and instead of claiming that this article was hijacked by fans (?) you should have opened a discussion first and tagged the page accordingly. (WP:MERGEPROP) Case in point, these are all seperate articles and on the contrary this discussion is far from over. We will have a proper consensus decision by the week. Please ping your future replies. Thanks. Savvyjack23 (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

You raise a lot of different points. I will address each:

• First sentence: I didn't say anything about what the UK site says about when the Haiti hospital was founded. What are you talking about?
• Second sentence: I am fine with mentioning the other similarly named hospitals here.
• Third sentence: I didn't say that these were chapters of the 'Hôpital Albert Schweitzer. The chapters support the various hospitals.
• Fourth - sixth sentences: I acknowledged that you have contested the merge, and opened this section to discuss what to do. So far you have other discussed other things, instead of that.
• User:Savvyjack23

Jytdog (talk) 20:15, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok jytdog let me put this another way because it clearly appears I am not getting through to you. Take Saint Joseph churches for example (the ones of the Catholic Church), they are all chapters (so-to-speak) of the one Catholic Church, yet they all have separate articles for their different locations and are seperate non-for-profit organizations undisputedly under the same umbrella (Catholic Church). The case here is a bit different. Both hospitals belong to the same organization that seeks to find all the hospitals in the world named after Albert S. and yet you think it is okay to turn this article into some sort of list and see nothing wrong with that? The only relationship these hospitals have with one another is that they share Albert S.' name and a mere 20+ year organization attempts to create mutual relations with one another but unlike the Catholic Church and its churches, it has no extended ownership to these hospitals unless stated otherwise. By organizing a none list article of multiple same-name articles, you are going off topic and hence cannot be the same article. So all the editors that contributed to the articles in other languages are all wrong (including myself)? Besides that there are other ways to do this that doesn't obstruct the creations of future articles under the same name; typically see alsos are used. Furthering my example in the case of Saint Joseph churches, it has a list page and a disambiguous page St. Joseph's. Now there isn't enough hospitals (at least as far as I know) to create a list page but instead a disambiguous page would be most appropriate and standard procedure.

Your second and third bullet also makes little to no sense. If you acknowledge that these hopsitals are not under the Hôpital Albert Schweitzer umbrella then what the heck are they doing in the same article? Yet in contrast of what you are saying, you would be willing to include a list of all articles baring the same name on this page. Your third bullet contradicts your SECOND. Savvyjack23 (talk)

We agree that the two hospitals are separate organizations. You have not acknowledged that 1) they are in the same tradition (the Haiti hospital was directly inspired by, and follows the motto and mission of, the original) and that 2) they are supported by the same international organizations. Please acknowledge these two facts. Once we are looking at the same facts, we can decide what to do next. Jytdog (talk) 22:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

1. Yes, I have acknowledged that Haiti's was inspired by Albert S.'s work in Gabon; a hospital that he himself founded.

2. No I emphatically do not agree that they are supported by the same international organizations. Same as in a handful of recent ones in an attempt to establish a relationship who are not even parent entities? Yes. Same as in all of them?, No. I have stated above if you read what I wrote, the Canadian Friends of Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (an international organization supports Haiti's hospital and mentions nothing of Gabon's. [19] I also mentioned Swiss Schweitzer Partnerschaft Hôpital Albert Schweizer Haiti; same situation. With your logic, by defintion all these places listed here after Christopher Columbus' name: 1. Follow the same tradition. 2. Internationally recognized by international organizations, quite possibly by a handful of the same and may have a sister relationship with one another as I mentioned what these hospital do have above. Are these shown on a single article? You're entire rhetoric is a fallacy. If this is your sole reason as to why these articles should remain as one and continue to stand by that then please do not respond to this until a wider consensus can be reached. Thanks for your input jytdog. Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:55, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

You continue to distort what i am saying and to not work toward resolving this, and to bring up offtopic and inaccurate "examples". You are not going to "catch" me and this isn't a fight, so please stop trying to "win". Please just keep this simple. Jytdog (talk) 00:35, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what you meant by that, by no means is this personal in any shape or form. Believe me, I am trying to keep this as simple as possible. With my examples I am merely trying to correlate WP:CONSISTENCY. Savvyjack23 (talk) 00:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello, popping in here following a request to say a few words. I hadn't known of the two independent articles and discovered that the reason why I was pinged was because I edited the article a few weeks ago. I had the last edit before the merge. Anyway, I see that the edit that I mage was part of my current AWB run that I've been working on since January 18. I making a lot of edits to articles that I wouldn't normally touch in this run, and that is the case with this article. I prefer articles that have some heft, so that would be one reason I could suggest to keep the merge, but again, I know nothing of these two hospitals, and I see that there's a disagreement with regard to the sources of support. I can't comment on that, but I can say that it could be helpful to retain the individual articles to reduce potential reader confusion. Dawnseeker2000 02:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in. so you semi-support splitting for clarity, and semi-support keeping them together for heft. OK. Jytdog (talk) 02:18, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Support splitting: They are not in proximity and have very different histories. The amount of material in the FRwiki articles may be used to develop them separately. Also I prefer to keep parity between Wikipedia articles when possible (for consistency between Wikipedias). WhisperToMe (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

• Support splitting: We sometimes find that a corporation will want different articles on their subdivisions, but this case is not similar. The two hospitals don't have a parent organization. By Googling for Albert Schweitzer, we discover that there are different charities inspired by the work of Albert Schweitzer that sometimes refer to one another in their fund-raising materials. Here is a British charity, Reverence for Life UK which identifies both the Lambarene hospital and the Haiti hospital as among their 'projects' but I don't see proof that there is any common management of the two hospitals. (See this page which mentions the British charity donating money to both hospitals). If the hospitals are actually one organization you would expect to see that fact explained in their publications. in my opinion, good sources would be needed to justify merging the articles on the two hospitals. Otherwise we are making the unsourced claim that these two hospitals are facets of one parent organization. Maybe we should create a sort of DAB page that lists all the notable entities that have 'Albert Schweitzer' in their names. We could make the beginning of such a DAB by using the material in http://www.schweitzerfellowship.org/about/albert-schweitzer/schweitzer-organizations. For a related example see Order of St. John (disambiguation). I was invited to comment on this issue by User:Savvyjack23 but I'm speaking here as a regular editor not as an admin. Obviously a formal RfC could be opened if the participants here can't come to an agreement. EdJohnston (talk) 17:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting User talk:EdJohnston. (pinging in case you are not watching this article) I never argued that the two hospitals were one organization. They are very clearly not and even the current version of the article makes it clear they are not (it even has two separate infoboxes). However, they a) are very much in the same tradition, with the Haiti hospital inspired by the Gabon hospital, and have the same mission; and b) they are supported by the same international network of Schweitzer fellowships; and c) sources about the Haiti hospital almost always mention the Gabon hospital that inspired it. SavvyJack continues to make a subtle conversation difficult by misrepresenting what I have been saying. Jytdog (talk) 18:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

• SO anyway, I am hearing SPLIT, so let's SPLIT. In my view, this article should be about the original hospital, and we should SPLIT the haiti content to Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Haiti). I do not think it is reasonable to make the main article a disambig. The follow-ons should have follow-on names, and we can interlink in See-alsos as necessary. Thoughts? Jytdog (talk) 21:57, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for all contributing thoughts and comments. Jytdog your view isn't necessarily the Wikipedian view. Just because something is the original, does not mean it is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. That is what we must determine. For example, St Patrick's Cathedral in Northern Ireland was built in 445AD. Although, the St. Patrick's Cathedral in Manhattan (one of the youngest) is more widely known. I had laid out an array of thoughts above if you carefully considered each one. Savvyjack23 (talk) 01:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I understand that you want to elevate all things Haiti. That is obvious. And enough already with the OFFTOPIC analogies. For the Nth time knock it off. Jytdog (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Excuse me? Please refrain from WP:PERSONAL attacks, views and uncivil comments. In the future also consider MERGETEXT procedures instead of picking apart two independent articles and then creating BIAS rules on its justification and thereof. Your intentions were clear from the beginning, in your words "So obviously fans or employees of the hospital in Haiti hijacked this article and turned it into their webpage. They also usurped the article name, which if anything should be for the original hospital in Africa." Personally attacking contributing editors without allowing an ounce of GOODFAITH. Nobody is picking a "fight," nobody is trying to "win" here. Stop playing the role of a moderator and address these concerns. Contribute to the discussion with something substantial, or please recuse yourself from this discussion. I have been diligently researching many articles pertaining to the matter and relinquished much time doing so to seek out what is most beneficial for the article at hand as I found it absolutely ludicrous for it to remain in its current state for reasons you already know. I suggest you do the same as I won't be leaving this discussion. Choose to deal with that fact or find another destination that needs work most suitable for your speed Jytdog. Thank you kindly. Savvyjack23 (talk) 02:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

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.

How to split

The following discussion 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.

---

• 1) Hôpital Albert Schweitzer for the original institution founded by Schweitzer in Gabon and Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Haiti) for the Haiti institution (and the same for any further articles that are created)
• 2) disambig at Hôpital Albert Schweitzer and Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Gabon) for Gabon and Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Haiti) for Haiti (and the same for any further articles that are created).

We will see what others talking here would prefer. Jytdog (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I must say, you did do a commendable job with the article's inline citations however, a vast improvement from when they were separated; so I am not blind to that fact and can give credit where it is due. Savvyjack23 (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to go on my gut with this one; de-merge to original respective pages (paste back Gabon's contents to Albert Schweitzer Hospital); then move Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (this article) to Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti and propose a deletion to its new redirect (Hôpital Albert Schweitzer) to make vacant for a move from Albert Schweitzer Hospital. This way histories for each respective article is in-tact or perhaps an admin can merge histories manually. Whichever way.

End results: Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (with Gabon's edit history transferred into) and Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti (with Haiti's edit history transferred into) Then create: Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (disambiguation) for every other page baring the contents of this name (France, Brazil etc.).

At this time, I would consider awarding the original hospital WP:PRIMARYTOPIC until indisputable evidence can be found against it. This seems like the best move right now. Savvyjack23 (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

I think you the result is 1) above, correct? If so that is fine. I don't care how you do it. Go ahead. Jytdog (talk) 04:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Almost. Agreed to half of 1)

Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (contents of Gabon)Y Hôpital Albert Schweitzer (Haiti)N but instead→ Hôpital Albert Schweitzer HaitiY This is what it will be ultimately. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

fine. Jytdog (talk) 05:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Please allow some time for full completion. Target page Hôpital Albert Schweitzer Haiti is pending deletion to receive contents from this article. Once that is done, Albert Schweitzer Hospital will be transferred here. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:34, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

You should ask for this page to be deleted as part of the move, so that the other page can simply be moved here when this is out of the way. Jytdog (talk) 05:53, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I know, can't do that yet. Patience is what we need. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:57, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

What can you not do yet? Do you know how to request a move? You would put that in the same request. Delete The HAS Haiti page, move this there, and delete this. Should be one request. Jytdog (talk) 05:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok, so fill out that second part of that request sport. The end result will be the same quit worrying so much. Savvyjack23 (talk) 06:13, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

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.