Talk:Cleveland Clinic

message: Here are a few examples of boosterism that were added to the article. Attempts to revert these additions have failed, so I'm going to restore the tag and maybe we can discuss these.
# "The Cleveland Clinic is nationally recognized as one of the top medical centers in the United States, particularly in technological and management systems and in the treatment of cardiovascular disease." This was changed to "The Cleveland Clinic is recognized as one of the top medical centers in the world, particularly in technological and management systems and in the treatment of cardiovascular disease." This change is not supported by the cited sources.
# Addition of "older" to "ratings stand in contrast to older rankings that feature a safety emphasis." This is an attempt to discredit these "older" ratings.
# Addition of "Another report by Consumer Reports in 2011 noted, however, that...". This is wp:synth. "However" is listed at MOS:OPED.
Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:28, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , these are minor issues, and I've fixed them. They can't have been the reason for this edit of yours, which removed most of the reputation section. Please explain what that edit was about. SarahSV (talk) 03:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, that edit had nothing to do with the three points listed above. Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

text: These hardly consider academic boosterism, with maybe exception to the first point (which was fixed). Point 2 is not valid in my opinion. The rankings that cite safety issues are indeed older. Perhaps we could use another word like "past." Without this modifier, it suggests that current safety ratings are poor which is false. Point 3 is not valid either. It is not balanced to have information about hospital safety without providing context; in this case, it has been documented that teaching hospitals have lower safety ratings in general. Wikiuser5991 (talk) 03:58, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boosterism 

message: *Whilst closing a RFC, I choose to go by the aims that even if there is no consensus for implementation of any broad proposal, the minimum common outcome ought be carved out and implemented.
**Accordingly, the unproven assertions of Septentrionalis, Jytdog and Ozzie's arguments are lensed through BlueRaspberry's potent note about the academic dissertations about these ratings (which is true enough) and leads me to note:-- 
***Jytdog's finer point about government rating(s) is correct enough (common sense) and I note:-- 
**I also note that Anaxial, Tim and Robert have stated that once a rating/award is established as notable, it ought be mentioned over the articles. DGG had also mentioned about a particular rating being treated as reliable in USA.
***Coupling this with BlueRaspbery's point, I note that:--
**To my eyes, the remaining participants did not air any opposing view to the broader facts expressed in my closure and discussed about implausibilities of implementing an uniform-ranking-system throughout the world et al.
*Thus, I do not see any case of super-voting in my garbs of closer.
*But, at the same time, it's a genuine cause of grievance, that editors over this local-thread (which seems to have precipitated the discussion) were not notified).  I agree that this article has been witness to strange COI-editing, which often-centered around removal of rating-tables and Sarah is quite-correct to remark 
**Nonetheless, that the behavior of the conflicted editor was not any bad throughout these issues and that at-least 3 concerned projects were notified (one of which is heavily active), I cannot choose to agree with a mere vacation of the closure on grounds of (what might easily be) a good-faith error.
*Considering the above points, I will urge Sarah to relaunch a RFC on the same locus at the earliest with a much definitive question and advertise it as widely as possible to generate a definitive closure, that will supersede mine.
*Best,∯WBGconverse 07:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments from closer

message: For the record: The accounts User:Wikiuser5991 and User:Tempest2552 are not affiliated with my work on Wikipedia. As far as I am aware, they were never authorized by Cleveland Clinic to make any edits on its behalf. I am the sole representative of Cleveland Clinic on Wikipedia. When I created my account in July 2017, I pledged I would not edit Cleveland Clinic articles directly as a result of my conflict of interest. I am currently looking into this internally to determine what happened.
Out of respect to editors who offered feedback when I originally proposed updates to Reputation, and the consensus from the RfC where I asked about the established standard for how ratings and rankings are included on hospital Wikipedia articles, I will recuse myself from the above and any further discussion of this article's Reputation section.    
Also, a quick note of apology: My RfC was meant to be a more general question on how rankings and reputation should be set up. Because it was a more general question about hospital articles throughout Wikipedia and not a specific question about Cleveland Clinic, it had not occurred to me that I should ping this Talk page about the RfC. I will be more mindful in the future to keep editors here in the loop. ClevelandClinicES (talk) 16:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Were any of your staff staying at the Radisson Milwaukee West on the night of August 18? Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Cleveland Clinic has been looking into this issue internally and has not yet identified anyone who was working on the page. I know for certain that no members of my team were staying at the above-mentioned hotel and I am the only person tasked with representing Cleveland Clinic here on Wikipedia. Our staff has been reminded of Cleveland Clinic's media policy that prohibits editing Wikipedia on behalf of the organization. ClevelandClinicES (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note from Cleveland Clinic 

message: Hello, Wikipedians. I've uploaded 10 historical Cleveland Clinic images to Wikimedia Commons that can be used in this article, or perhaps History of Cleveland Clinic. These include historical photographs of Cleveland Clinic buildings, labs, doctors, and the aftermath of the 1929 Cleveland Clinic fire. I also uploaded an image of the Cleveland Plain Dealer's May 16, 1929 front page on the day after the fire. I'm not asking for all of these images to be used, or even any photo in particular. I simply wanted to provide the Wikipedia community with additional resources for your disposal. The images are:
*:File:Biochemical_Lab_1921_A0422a.jpg
*:File:Clinic_Lab_c_1950_A0395.jpg
*:File:Clinic_Founders_A5595.jpg
*:File:Crile_Building_A6110.jpg
*:File:Drs_Rene_Favaloro_and_Mason_Sones_c1970_A0353.jpg 
*:File:Dr._Irvine_Page_and_Lab_Tech_1960s_A3112.jpg
*:File:Original_Clinic_Building_c1921.jpg
*:File:Original_Clinic_Building_Interior_1921.jpg
*:File:Original_Clinic_Bookplate.jpg
*:File:Xray_file_room_after_disaster_1929_A6159.jpg
*:File:Cleveland Plain Dealer front page - May 16, 1929.jpg
Blue Rasberry, are any of these images helpful? As Cleveland Clinic’s representative on Wikipedia, I have a financial conflict of interest and will not make changes to the article myself. Thanks, ClevelandClinicES (talk) 20:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical images are available 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hello, I noticed that recent edits have introduced outdated and incorrect information to the article. 
The infobox claims Cleveland Clinic has 1,500 beds (no citation given in the article). However, our main campus bed count is 1,348; total for enterprise is 4,540. Unfortunately, these current figures have not been published yet, but given that the incorrect figure in the article is unsourced, I wanted to place the correct figure here for editors to consider. 
The editor had also added that Cleveland Clinic's main campus had a Level I adult and pediatric trauma emergency department. That was removed, and the article now says the main campus has a "Level II adult & pediatric trauma". Cleveland Clinic's main campus emergency department is a non-trauma center. The Northeast Ohio Trauma System confirms Cleveland Clinic's emergency services. 
I wanted to note here for future reference: Cleveland Clinic Akron General has a Level I Adult Trauma Center, Cleveland Clinic Fairview has a Level II Adult Trauma Center, and Cleveland Clinic Hillcrest has a Level II Adult Trauma Center.
Various other stats were updated using figures Cleveland Clinic reported from 2018, such as number of hospitals and facilities, employees, physicians, specialties, and main campus size. I will present updated 2019 stats once published.
As Cleveland Clinic’s representative on Wikipedia, I have a financial conflict of interest and will not make changes to the article myself. Thank you, ClevelandClinicES (talk) 13:37, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect and outdated stats 

message: What causes my ankles to swell? 2600:6C4A:5D00:17F4:C561:67B3:4B52:EE16 (talk) 03:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swollen ankles 

message: I'm not sure if there is a way to do this within template parameters, but in addition to a helipad, Cleveland Clinic additionally has operated out of the airport 3G3 in Wadsworth, Ohio since 2018. I'm not sure how to do that. C2 J45driver16 (talk) 06:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this a possible update to the info box?