Talk:History of Cleveland Clinic

Cleveland Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Cleveland, the scope of which includes Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.ClevelandWikipedia:WikiProject ClevelandTemplate:WikiProject ClevelandCleveland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hospitals Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Talk:Cleveland Clinic/edit requests was copied or moved into History of Cleveland Clinic. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

HealthMonitor (talk · contribs) has been paid by Cleveland Clinic on their behalf. See this edit to disclosure and the article history.

Strange opposition[edit]

Several experienced Wikipedia users were insistent that this article not be in Wikipedia. I think this is because the text is provided by someone with an affiliation to the organization. I was unable to get any explanation from any of them. More information is at Talk:Cleveland_Clinic#History_of_Cleveland_Clinic. Sorry for the delay in posting this - Wikipedia can be a bureaucracy. This text has been pending since mid 2015. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Odd style[edit]

Is there some reason for the unusual section headings and citation style? Kendall-K1 (talk) 16:56, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kendall-K1 This is text from a new user. They did not know Wikipedia's house style. Anyone can change it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:54, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We don't normally change citation styles without consensus. If no one objects I might try to get rid of all those urls, which I think make the ref section less readable. Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kendall-K1 This text is 12+ months old. There is no reason to anticipate that anyone feels strongly about the citation style. Change it as you like. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]