Talk:Providence Health & Services

The official business relationship bewteen Providence and Swedish is an affiliation, not an acquisition ^{[1] [2]}. It is a false statement to report it as otherwise, and is also unsourced information. ErinShwatty (talk) 20:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The official name is an affiliation but anyone with brains knows that if you take over all finances for a company without the intention of giving the finances back it is an acquisition. Affiliation is just a word to make people feel better about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.173.0.16 (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I think this article should be merged with Providence Medical Group. They are two very similar topics, and I don't think Prov medical group is notable enough to warrant its own unique page. Thoughts? Rytyho usa (talk) 00:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I am fully in support as not only is Providence Medical Group essentially covered by this article, it's exceedingly short. Voltaire's Vaquero (talk) 18:37, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@2600:6c50:37f:fcc8:bc9d:e5e3:aeb0:4fcb, 73.44.28.216, 73.25.190.117, Melissaannegrace, 156.72.30.1, and Snooganssnoogans: I've recently noticed that there has been a dispute that has turned into a bit of an edit war on the article as of late. I invite all those involved to reach consensus here, and I've sent a talk page message out to those involved. I strongly advise you to not edit the article until closure has been reached on the article.

The main problem is that a variety of editors have, over several days, have been re-adding and removing a specific paragraph critical of Providence Health & Services (history). This paragraph was removed for not being a reliable source, however I go against this as in the perennial sources list the New York Times (which was the source used) was deemed to be reliable after a large number of discussions. Thoughts wanted, though! dibbydib ^boop or _snoop 00:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I see undisclosed paid editing and a definite COI problem with these whitewashing edits. I am not bonded to the subject of the article, but I find disconcerting that a NYT reference keeps getting removed by a publicist or other paid advocate. Ifnord (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

The COI accounts need to explain what the problem with the NYT content is. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 22:43, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. The editor recently removed sourced content from the New York Times, believing it to be inaccurately reported information. This is not a good enough reason to remove sourced content. This is particularly concerning as the author has declared a conflict of interest, identifying himself/herself as a employee of Providence, working in the communications department. I would encourage editors to weigh in on this issue, and refer to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for more information. Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 22:45, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the advertisement tag; it looks like this has been addressed. If anyone disagrees, I would encourage discussion. Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 04:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

This article indicates an intent to merge, but more info needs to be found to relate the merger properly > 2015 -- https://www.spokanejournal.com/local-news/providence-health-eyes-large-merger/ . --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)