User talk:Nstewartaap

American Academy of Pediatrics

I went back to my copy of the page after your reversion. The reason for this was that the language of the original is not acceptable wiki material. If there is content you think needs to go edit it in - but please remember the rules about editing and what can be included :) If you want to make mass changes etc. it is best to discuss them here: Talk:American Academy of Pediatrics first. One final thing to remember is that what the AAP "want" is somewhat irrlevant - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and so will record knowledge according to a set of standard rules/procedures decided on by the whole community :) --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 14:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Some of the information you've added is incorrect and I've edited it again to correct that. For instance, the AAP does not offer the board-certification test, and the AAP runs CME for more than just specialists.

Why remove information about how pediatricians are trained? I added this back in too.

Also edited for consistency between AAP, academy, Academy.

Information about how pediatricians are trained is relevant only for the pediatrician article :) it is not relevant to the AAP article; because it is an article purely about the AAP and what they do. I reverted your edit as you added a large amount of information (including wording like "The AAP offers" which is discouraged) and then re-edited in your suggested improvements - please take a look and see what you think. --Errant Tmorton166^(Talk) 15:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I saw your edit to AAP. I think what you would want to cite if someone asks is WP:UNDUE. Please provide WP:Edit summaries when you make large edits like that. Also, You should probably declare your COI on User:Nstewartaap (create the page) if it exists. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest notice/suggestion

Hello, Nstewartaap. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 23:46, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like a tour?

Hello user:Nstewartaap. My name is Lane and I work at Consumer Reports, which is a media partner with your organization for the Choosing Wisely campaign. Wikipedia is the world's most consulted source of information about a great many things, including many topics in pediatrics, and I am supposed to be contributing to articles about pediatrics with the scholarly research content your organization has provided to mine. If you are interested in Wikipedia, would you like to look at this with me? I could give you a tour of Wikipedia just as I do with anyone else who is interested in greater public access to health information.

Wikipedia works because it is a public forum for sharing information from existing reliable sources. A certain number of people have commented to you about what you want to do and a larger number of people have noticed this and not commented, and it is the same with so many health articles here. You really have found a place where a lot of people care about presenting good information backed by good sources - could I show you around? You can email me at Special:EmailUser/Bluerasberry. It would be the community's wish that your organization take more interest in an article like "pediatrics", which gets 40k visitors a month and is of broad international interest, before looking at the AAP article, which gets 2k visitors a month. Whatever you do here takes multiple volunteers' time, and people are most motivated when they have the biggest impact. A lot of people care about the content your organization produces and I wish there were a good way to share it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:39, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]