Talk:John Halamka

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright problem[edit]

This page launched as, and still constructed mainly of, an autobiography posted here. While the doctor encouraged use of it on Wikipedia (the appropriateness of him pushing his autobiography here being a separate question), it should be noted that while his blog is released under a Creative Commons license, it is not a sufficient license to allow inclusion, as per WP:ICT/FL. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Halamka has now deleted the blog does not erase the fact that the material is copyright to him, and that this is a copyright violation. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Self promoting article originally written by his daughter[edit]

I believe "khdamselfly" who wrote much of this is his daughter Kathy Halamka. The surname is not all that common, check pinterest for "Damselfly and Halamka", bingo, Kathy Halamka, coincidence stretched a little too far! How accurate the information is I cannot say, and maybe there was no bad intent, but I don't think this should be on Wikipeadia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.3.169.112 (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on John Halamka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Halamka. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lack of third-party sources[edit]

At this point, it looks like the only third-party source used in this article is a New York Times article used just once, in the intro. This is a lack of the sort of reliable, third-party sourcing our guidelines call for, and also raises the question of whether the subject meets our notability threshold. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]