Talk:The Office of Health Economics

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

ChrisSampson87 (talk · contribs) has been paid by The Office of Health Economics. Declaration on User:ChrisSampson87

Creator CoI

I created this page. I work at this company. A clear conflict of interest, agreed. But my intentions are good. The company is certainly notable. It is (perhaps) the first organisation ever to exist in the field of health economics. I won't make any more edits, but will be happy to discuss here. ChrisSampson87 (talk) 14:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ChrisSampson87: Given that this organization is over 50 years old, I suspect that it could meet notability guidelines(please review at WP:ORG if you haven't already) but the article currently lacks independent reliable sources that indicate that it would. In short, the guidelines call for sources that give in depth coverage of the subject(not just a mere mention). The sources currently on the page do little more than establish that this organization exists. 331dot (talk) 14:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Thanks. Agreed. But I'm wary of editing and would rather others did so. Scholarly sources are largely the organisations own outputs (e.g. ISBN 978-1-84619-171-8 and ISBN 978-0-9525601-5-9). Reference in news coverage is generally incidental, but not in short supply (see, for example, BBC News). ChrisSampson87 (talk) 15:11, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thanks for your reply. 331dot (talk) 15:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed content

Due to my conflict of interest (discussed above), I do not wish to make further edits to this article. However, I would like to provide some suggestions for material to take the article beyond being a stub.

OHE's publications: This is perhaps the most notable aspect of OHE's work in terms of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. OHE has been regularly publishing scholarly output for over 50 years, and this output has been widely cited. Most of it can be accessed at https://www.ohe.org/publications
OHE's competition commission: This was a particularly notable piece of work funded by the Department of Health, which reported in 2012. Information is available at https://www.ohe.org/research/ohe-commission-competition-nhs ChrisSampson87 (talk) 15:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]