User talk:Aplante1

Conflict of Interest

Hello! Do you have a conflict of interest, as in do you work for Harvard University or the Recovery Research Institute? Happy editing!HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I do work for them! I thought my references were solid because we are research institute that produces research, but I saw your comment that they articles of the researchers, but are researchers are us essentially...

We are a real non-profit research institute of Harvard University and Mass General Hospital, I see that as an employee I am not allowed to make the posting, but I feel like the institute is notable and should have a page?

Thanks for your quick reply and honesty! The thing to do is to not make any more edits. If you would like to have changes to the page made, you can use the request edit feature, and someone who is uninvolved will edit the page. It's considered vey bad form, and to say the least extremely undesirable to have persons connected to an organization edit their own pages. As to notability, that will be determined when more editors look at it. It seems to me that it is not notable (the epople in it might be) since it does not have that many significant mentions in the press/media/books. If you have references and sources that specifically mention the RRI, then post them here. They have to be reliable, as in not written by anyone associated with the RRI. For example, three or four non-trivial mentions in publications like the NY Times or the Boston Globe would do it. See WP:RS. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:12, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pro Talk citation: http://www.rehabs.com/pro-talk-articles/how-rehab-claims-about-success-can-steer-you-the-wrong-way/

Boston Globe: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/02/03/finding-right-words-for-addiction/EdNzUNS10KQDinOEk3lQpN/story.html

American Psychological Association article: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/03/words-matter.aspx

Addiction Professional: http://www.addictionpro.com/news-item/new-language-regarding-addiction-aims-reduce-stigma-and-blame — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.243.211 (talk) 22:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

None of the references you give above deal with the "Recovery Research Instititue" in detial-- they are just passing mentions. This is essentially why the page was deleted: not enough sources. Have a nice day. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Recovery research institute

The article Recovery research institute has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article is ful of references but they do not deal with the institute itself-- they're about the doctors and the research papers it published. Other refs are self-published. Absence of good refs dealing with the subject means it fails WP:GNG. Article was also very likely created by a COI editor for promotional purposes. See COIN discussion also.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Globe citiation: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/02/03/finding-right-words-for-addiction/EdNzUNS10KQDinOEk3lQpN/story.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.243.211 (talk) 22:28, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Recovery research institute for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Recovery research institute is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recovery research institute until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:26, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aplante1, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Aplante1! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Soni (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Aplante1

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Aplante1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 20:09, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]