Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:48, 2 January 2025

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

Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Society of Anesthesiologists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070404075449/http://www.anes.uab.edu/aneshist/aneshist.htm to http://www.anes.uab.edu/aneshist/aneshist.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Addition of lobbying section UNDUE concerns

This is a relatively short article about a professional organization. Recently a lobbying section was added which is entirely negative and roughly doubles the length of the article. Additionally, it seems much of that content is based on grabbing any/all examples that could be considered problematic lobbying and inserting them into the article as a continuous section. It is possible that some amount of this material is DUE in the article. At this point the addition has been challenged thus consensus is needed to decide how much of the new content should be included. I'm reaching out to project Medicine to get additional editor feedback. Springee (talk) 19:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I share these concerns. In my opinion, the lobbying section as it currently stands does not express a neutral point of view. T g7 (talk) 22:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I agree that the lobbying section appears biased. That was my original concern about it and why I removed it. Neither thenightaway nor DACartman has explained why they felt the need to add/keep that content to/on the page. Can one of you help me understand this review process? If "project Medicine" agrees, does the content get removed? Thank you. Gsasa1061 (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I think removal for the time being makes sense. I'm not sure that permanent removal is correct but it might be better to talk, objectively, about the lobbying efforts. That can include things they have pushed for that have helped safety (were they involved with standardizing anesthesia carts to prevent patient injury related to user errors?) as well as lobbying that might be viewed as self serving. I think the later should be minimized and probably should also point to a (hypothetical) article on the influence of lobbying on healthcare. Gsasa1061, something you can do that would help is provide WP:RS's on the topic. Springee (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• C-Class medicine articles
• Low-importance medicine articles
• All WikiProject Medicine pages
• C-Class organization articles
• Unknown-importance organization articles
• WikiProject Organizations articles