User talk:Tom Cod

Inter Alia:

Initiated article on Church Farm School; contributed to Governor Dummer Academy. Creator of articles Joseph F. Quinn and Richard Mattingly murder case.

My apologies, I was patrolling the Recent changes page, looking for vandalism. I have left your comment on the talk page, because I think it would look a little funny for me to remove it--someone might think that I was trying to vandalize! If you still think it should be removed, please do so when you are logged in AND provide an explanation in the edit summary. As the young people say, “my bad”. Cynrin 14:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[[1]]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Tom - From our friend Faye Haskins "I'm the photo librarian for the Star photo morgue in the MLK Public Library in D.C. The Post deposited the "Star collection" at the Library-- clips, photo morgue, papers/records, etc. they purchased when the Star closed. More info is at our website: http://www.dclibrary.org/node/2607. The Post retains copyright to the photos but thru an agreement between DCPL & thePost, we/I handle all licensing & reproductions. We also have all editions of the Star on microfilm in our main reading room." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.146.156.34 (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much.

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tom Cod. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message at my talk page about Bastyr University.

We get a lot of fringe health content at Wikipedia and I hope that you appreciate that a lot of alternative medicine is unregulated and bunk. Among institutions that teach alternative medicine, Bastyr should be a nice example of organizations that regulate themselves to standards, publish research, take an evidence-based approach to what they do, and target more informed user communities.

On our wiki side there are no staff to manage content, so as a volunteer community, we work with the content we have. I do not want to criticize anyone, but I will say that it is not easy to get a non-promotional third party review of what Bastyr is, what they do, and the kind of fundamental content which would be in Wikipedia if it were easily available. What would be ideal is an encyclopedia article somewhere else in a reliable source which Wikipedia could rewrite to pull the facts and put in our article.

We in Wikipedia do not work well with PR departments. We do work well with students, but it seems like Bastyr has never had any of its student engage with the Wikipedia, and at this point, 15 years have passed with silence from that side. I have talked with a few professors there in the past about wiki engagement but it never got off the ground.

Wiki depends on someone's time and labor to write articles. If you ever find someone to put in the time to develop the article then it could happen piece wise. I am not sure what more to say except that I wish we could find the right content to build out this article. Thanks for messaging me and yes I watch the talk page at Bastyr and saw your conversatino. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I, who am not at all a partisan of naturopathy, which is not the sole course of study at Bastyr, was shocked by the adversarial tone of this article and the inappropriate, high profile placement of references and blurbs to Quackwatch and the rogues gallery of individuals placed in the Notable Alumni section which casts this state accredited institution overall in a false light. The result is that the article comes across as an inflammatory and scurrilous hit piece to any reasonable, fair minded observer. But every attempt I made to tone down the article and give it more balance and a more neutral tone was summarily reverted as "whitewashing". When I finally mentioned that hey, one would never see such an article, even a critically minded one, outside of an editorial page in [reputable] sources like the NYT or Britannia, I received the arrogant response that Wikipedia is not like those. Sadly, my rejoinder would be, if I did not want to avoid a further flame war, is that "it shows". A sad commentary, but now I see why schools like Middlebury no longer allow Wikipedia to be cited as a source in academic coursework. Very disappointed by this which undermines Wikipedia's crediblity in my mind a little. Tom Cod (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]