Talk:Lahey Hospital & Medical Center

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

Hospitals Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Massachusetts Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Untitled

The previous version was deleted because somebody claimed that I copied the cited references.

Note: There are three or four-word sentences that are required to be used because they are clinic names. The fact that they exist in the article as well as the cited references must not be construed as copying or a copyright violation. ---LymanSchool 23:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second source references

I just added many second-source references. This should allow the POV restrictions to be removed. --LymanSchool 14:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listing a bunch of sources that mention the Lahey Clinic does not substantiate the introduction about medical clinics in the early twentieth century, nor does it change the tone of the article. Is there nothing bad about this place whatsoever? Is there any source except the hospital's website that says they treat patients with the "greatest compassion"? That's just advertising propaganda and is meaningless unless the level of actual compassion is compared in reliable sources to other hospitals. The article reads like a press release, because you based it entirely on the Lahey Clinic website. —Centrx→talk • 16:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I was able to find a lawsuit or two, including one person from Rhode Island who sued to be able to use Lahey instead of whatever his HMO wanted (he lost). Now the link, cited in the article about "greatest compassion", if you followed it, would explain, and talk about the end-of-life stuff that I am talking about [1]. That's what hospitals for the terminally-ill mean about "greatest of compassion." I do give a hint, actual words about death. Maybe I should remove the sentence? Yes, it does read like an advertisement, just like the other famous clinic, Mayo Clinic. It's the same idea all around. These places are non-profit operations and teaching hospitals. They become very famous and everything about them begins to sound like a cheap ad. However, the new links cited talk about U.S. Governmental agencies, reviews, etc. It's not just about "names" a google search brings up hundreds, perhaps thousands of names. --LymanSchool 17:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to find some dirt to give a more balanced view, I instead, found more good information about Dr. Lahey and his clinic. He was FDR's personal physician! He was also involved in getting medics for the Army in WWII. Check the article again. Also, I got rid of some superlatives. --LymanSchool 22:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, seeking dirt is not necessary, but if you have non-trivial sources they can do the presenting of an accurate description. All the sources you listed are about some very particular thing happening with regard to the hospital, or an empty directory entry of "best hospitals". There must be a feature in a magazine, or a few pages in a book about it? Also, what is currently in the article is not well-sourced. Where did the first paragraph come from at all? If it's just from your personal knowledge, it still needs some published sources from medical histories. Also, it still reads like an advertisement. "a patient’s medical needs are almost always met", "treated with compassion", etc. are still not appropriate for an encyclopedia and are just re-worded from the hospital's propaganda. Take a look at some featured articles for examples. —Centrx→talk • 23:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Image-LayheClinicLogo.jpg

Image:Image-LayheClinicLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: official sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lahey Hospital & Medical Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/best-hospitals/directory/glance_6140690.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:38, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]