Talk:Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

message: This history is pretty mild maybe Edwin Blacks book "war Against The Weak" should be cited.  This Lab was involved in Eugenics a monstrous program against humans.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.92.12 (talk) 02:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: There was a recently-created article called "Harrison Dimple Jr." that led me to write to the public information officer of the CSHL. After he denied the existence of Dimple I invited him to look over our related articles. He sent me some corrections that I edited into this article. They seem reasonable to me, but I cannot take responsibility for them and other editors should make up their own minds. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:41, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
Reverted it. thanks guys --130.108.185.198 03:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What did you revert? -Will Beback 05:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Look over the history of the IP.  He's just a sneaky vandal. – ClockworkSoul 13:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

text: They are mentioned in the last paragraph.  ·:·Will Beback  ·:· 05:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Over the transom

message: I don't understand why my bona fide change is being reverted. The article currently states that the laboratory is named after the village of Cold Spring Harbor, which is not true (and not in the references supplied, one of which is a broken link). Both the village and the laboratory are named after the actual harbor. It is simply preposterous to suggest that the lab is named after a village in which it is not located. --209.6.132.39 (talk) 23:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: In the graf about Watson, the first reference to the controversy said he spoke to "The Times".  I clarified this to The Times, which is what the James Watson article says, but I see lower in the same graf it says The Sunday Times, which was (maybe still is) a separate newspaper.  Which is it?  Either way, it's still unnecessarily confusing, given that a reader has to follow the links to find out that the newspaper being referred to is the one whose nameplate reads "The Times" (or "The Sunday Times") and not the one to which the phrase "The Times" normally refers to in the context of Long Island (i.e., The New York Times).  121a0012 (talk) 20:37, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Watson controversy 

message: I’m writing to establish contact with editors who have an interest in the Wikipedia page for Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. This should include editors who are concerned with ongoing Wiki projects on “Genetics”; “History of Science”; “Long Island” and “National Register of Historic Places” Also, editors interested in “Eugenics” and the “American Eugenics Movement” might be interested, as well as those interested in biology, genetics, and molecular biology. I have been working on edits for the page and wanted to make clear who I am and what my relationship is with CSHL. It is important that you understand the purpose of these edits, which is to factually describe CSHL’s history and current operations. I am an employee of CSHL; my title is Senior Science Writer. I have two primary functions. One is to interview faculty members who publish new research; read and study their work; and write about it so that non-scientists – mainly, other writers -- can understand what has been done. My other function is to perform historical research for the Laboratory and occasionally to write about important science and scientists who have made notable contributions. I have a Ph.D. in History from Cornell University; I am an active historian, focusing on early-20th century U.S. history; and I am also an employee of the University of Pennsylvania, where I teach non-fiction writing in the Center for Programs in Creative Writing. I state my affiliations up front. I thoroughly endorse the effort being made within the Wikipedia/Wikimedia community to clarify and make it possible to assess those who write or edit on subjects related to their employment. In keeping with the “Terms of use/Paid contribution amendment” page [1]: I receive a salary from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. As my other affiliations and accreditations should indicate, I am also a trained U.S. historian, still practicing; and a university teacher. My interest in offering edits of the CSHL Wikipedia page is not motivated by the desire to advertise or promote. I am a “good-faith editor.” My interest is in facts; specifically, in adding facts to the current entry in order to provide a fuller, more contextualized account. I note the discussion in the “Paid contributions” document of “GLAM”: contributors who work at galleries, libraries, archives and museums. I agree that it is important for the community to be able to benefit from the expertise that employees of such institutions can offer. As an academic, I offer contributions to the CSHL page in similar good faith. There are situations in which individuals who know an institution best can make important contributions – the main qualifier being that such contributions must be both factual and supported with citations. I follow this practice, standard in my academic field of History.
Here is a brief sketch of what I hope to add to the current CSHL page: [inserted last week & today] 1. Add additional contextual and factual information to the 2 introductory paragraphs [submitted last week]; 2. Add a new section, “Research programs,” that provides accurate figures on employees and a fuller account of the Laboratory’s current research programs – there is currently no detail at all. 3. Add a section outlining “Education programs.” The current page uses “Meetings and Courses” as a placeholder for such information – which is factually misleading and represents only a fraction of the actual program. 4. Add 1 paragraph on “Funding” – sources of; and % apportionment of funds within the five main research areas.  In the near future, I intend to edit the History section as follows (I encourage discussion):  Add detail to the “History” section as follows: Divide the history into “Early history” and “Post-World War Two history.” (or, “Modern history”) The Laboratory was very important in both periods, in different ways. Its role in eugenics research should be both amplified and properly contextualized. Its postwar history is not described in organized fashion on the current Wikipedia page. I have organized and added to the existing copy. In the Post-WWII section, the Laboratory’s early role as one of the incubators of the entire field of molecular genetics, and subsequently molecular biology, is not described in the current page. The account, from a History-of-Science-point-of-view is impoverished. Recent achievements are not mentioned in coherent fashion and are not up to date on the current page. 6. I have written 3 paragraphs on “CSHL Leadership,” which explains the role of James D. Watson – correcting factual errors in the current version and adding detail; and adding the contribution of Bruce Stillman, who has been Director of the Lab since 1993. This information does not appear in the current CSHL page. Historian78 (talk) 18:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for disclosing your financial link. If you haven't already, please familiarize yourself with Conflict of interest editing guidelines. The most important things, based on Wikipedia policy, are that you strive to edit fairly and neutrally, without promotional or excessive details, and without original research (i.e. your own personal opinions, or unpublished analyses). I haven't closely examined your edits, so this is general advice: Wikipedia articles should never be used as (or even resemble) extensions of official websites. Press releases, breaking news or cherry-picked positive information should be given little to no emphasis, especially if disproportionate to the total body of literature on a subject. Negative or embarrassing information can and should be included as well if it has received substantial attention from reliable, secondary sources. Please also see Advice for expert editors: writing for Wikipedia is different from writing a review article, research article, or essay. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 23:25, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 21, 2014 edits -- Note of intention from the editor (Historian78)