Talk:2023 Beijing hospital fire

China: History Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as Low-importance).

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hospitals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 19 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Changfeng Hospital fire. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Requested move 19 April 2023

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: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 20:27, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Beijing hospital fire → Changfeng Hospital fire – more specific Bremps! 00:00, 19 April 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – Material Works 20:14, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose - per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. I'd be happy to change my !vote if there's evidence to the contrary. Estar8806 (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Most Chinese Sources describe the incident as Changfeng Hospital fire or Beijing Changfeng Hospital fire. Some sources include:

https://news.ifeng.com/c/8P6ZPIBy96l

https://new.qq.com/rain/a/20230419A003X400.html

https://www.sohu.com/a/668088405_121434717

And so on, I think we should rename. Yxuibs (talk) 02:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral on 'Beijing' vs 'Changfeng Hospital', but please keep a year in there, so Oppose as presently stated. Polyphemus Goode (talk) 11:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The new title wouldn't need the year. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We generally prefer keeping the year per WP:NCEVENT, unless the event is overwhelmingly known by a proper name. This one apparently isn't. No such user (talk) 09:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose keep year and recognisable title In ictu oculi (talk) 14:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Changfeng Hospital as both articles are way too short. We could easily create a history section in the article about the hospital itself. 152.130.6.77 (talk) 15:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merged. 162 etc. (talk) 21:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - The hospital is not well known enough either outside or inside China to warrant a standalone title. All major headlines even for China-specific media outlets go with some variant of "Beijing hospital" and not the named one. - Fuzheado | Talk 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. It's obviously better to use the name of the actual hospital, well-known or not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: Relisted to get a clearer consensus. – Material Works 20:14, 26 April 2023 (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.