Talk:VITAS Healthcare

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 20 March 2015 by reviewer L235 (talk · contribs).

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.

ProperPen (talk · contribs) has been paid by VITAS Healthcare. Their editing has included contributions to this article.

Currently the (Wikipedia) page "Chemed Corporation" does not exist

I am not sure whether a Wikipedia article about "Chemed Corporation" "should" exist; but it seems like a reasonable topic to consider. Chemed is the parent company of both "VITAS Healthcare" and "Roto-Rooter".

I noticed that: if you click on

[Link1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Chemed+Corporation

then
[A] it might get [auto] "forwarded" to a longer "?search=[...]" URL, but one which is still very similar, except for the addition of some stuff like

["part of" Link2?] &ns0=1&ns1=1&ns5=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1

which I know very little (and care even less) about. Also,

[B] the resulting web page says -- (in part) -- right near the beginning -- something like

The page "Chemed Corporation" does not exist.

(and if that *link* is a "RED" one, then ... "hovering" your mouse pointer over that link, might bring up a little tooltip, saying pretty much the same thing.)

It would seem logical to me that, if "VITAS Healthcare" is notable enough for its page to exist, and if Roto-Rooter is also sufficiently notable, then their parent company, "Chemed Corporation" ... would *** probably *** be notable enough.

But such a guess might be wrong; and ... even if it is correct ... apparently, being "notable enough" does not guarantee that a certain topic or "subject" will have its own Wikipedia article.

Perhaps it could happen -- for a certain topic or "subject" -- that no one has stepped up, yet, to start the article; or ... the article might have existed, but it might have gotten gotten deleted.^{[but I think I would probably have been 'notified' or 'warned' about a case of 'previous article deletion', ... if that had been 'applicable' here, in this case; (right?)]}

Any comments? Mike Schwartz (talk) 22:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]