The result was userfy. There is strong consensus that the articles as they exist are not suitable for mainspace. Once they are cleaned up, they can be moved back. - brenneman {L} 07:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
According to the discussion at Talk:Health care reform, the creation of this group of articles appears to have been encouraged by a college instructor at Duke University, User:Conoverc, for his Politics of Health Care class to address why universal health care proposals have been defeated despite overwhelming public support for universal coverage. To me, WP:OR appears to have been violated in that a synthesis of published material serving to advance a position appears in each article. He admitted to devising a common article template for his students to use in order to reach the conclusion "why the window of opportunity (for reform) closed", and the edit histories reveal a flurry of referenced assertions in the various sections of each article. In my opinion, the position being advanced is that reform or change is an "opportunity"; the synthesis is the A + B + C insertion of references to reach that conclusion. Medtopic 10:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC) reply
<ref>d</ref>
, and I certainly am too, but I'm not going push for its deletion on those grounds. That, like everything else in these articles, can be improved.OK, I'm going to start a list and I hope that others who have 'voted' to keep and cleanup will sign on to help.