Talk:John E. Fogarty International Center

Updated logo and other changes for accuracy
Following review of contact us I am adding the "request edit" indicator, and removing my intention to make the edits due to my COI. I will continue to search for a someone with no COI to apply the changes.

--A.Ellis 14:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

I am web manager (contractor) with the Fogarty International Center at NIH. I am looking for someone to apply changes to our organization's page to reflect our current branding and to increase accuracy.


 * LOGO - The logo could be updated to match the current organizational branding (the white NIH mark, plus the text "Fogarty" on a green background). See the Fogarty Facebook profile image for an example https://www.facebook.com/fogarty.nih/photos/a.449708328430.246227.127485003430/10151541374448431/?type=1&theater. This change is in line with logo policy changes implemented across the NIH in late 2012 and throughout 2013.  (See article from NIEHS http://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/newsletter/2013/2/spotlight-nihlogo/.)


 * STAFF - The list of "agency executives" is currently out of date. It could be updated according to the current staff directory. http://www.fic.nih.gov/About/Staff/Pages/staff-directory.aspx


 * STRATEGIC PLAN - The center has a new strategic plan. Updated information is at http://www.fic.nih.gov/About/Pages/Strategic-Plan.aspx.


 * PROGRAMS - The list of current programs is out of date. Current programs are listed at http://www.fic.nih.gov/Programs/Pages/default.aspx.

--A.Ellis 17:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. For the logo, I would encourage you to keep the logo in the infobox up-to-date directly as a non-controversial edit allowed by WP:COI. The same goes for infobox data, such as the list of execs, though you should exercise caution in not making the list excessive. For "Strategic Plan" I'm not sure what you want done in regards to that document. Generally we require independent, secondary sources that are credible and have a reputation for fact-checking. We probably don't need a comprehensive list of programs, depending on how many there are, rather than just a summary of what the organization does. CorporateM (Talk) 05:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your edits and feedback. As recommended I have updated the infobox information. I updated to the logo file to reflect current branding, and reduced the scope of listed agency executives to only our director A.Ellis 14:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisap (talk • contribs)

Lead
I find it a bit odd that the first thing the lead tells us is that the Center is "part of the federal government of the United States". Well, yes, but then so are lots of things; should it not probably tell us first what it is, rather than what it's part of? The government thing doesn't feel to me like the most urgent and defining fact to get over to readers. I would try a little reword myself but I don't know the subject matter well. I would be delighted to see someone else have a go, please? Thanks and best wishes LBN (talk) 14:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Update in history section to accurately reflect budget,
I am the web manager with the Fogarty International Center at NIH, and am a federal employee. Our organization's page does not reflect our funding status in the "History" section. Currently, paragraph 2 notes that "In March 2017, the Trump Administration proposed cuts to the NIH budget, including elimination of the Fogarty Center, saving $69 million." There is no mention of subsequent appropriations from Congress.

Can someone please update the information to reflect that Congress has continued to appropriate funding for the Fogarty International Center, providing approximately $72.2 million in Fiscal Year 2017 and $75.7 million in Fiscal Year 2018.

I you think it is appropriate for me to update this information for accuracy I am happy to do it.

A.Ellis 16:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisap (talk • contribs) 16:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Reply 22-NOV-2019
Regards, Spintendo  16:45, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The claim cannot be implemented because it is not clear from the supplied reference that the funds were directed to the Fogarty Center, inasmuch as a distinction exists between the NIH and the Fogarty Center.
 * Please supply references which clearly indicate that monies were directed to the subject organization rather than the NIH overall.
 * The COI editor is reminded of the necessity to sign all talk page posts using four tildes.
 * When ready to proceed with the requested information, kindly change the  template's answer parameter to read from yes to no. Thank you!

Some proposed changes
I am the web manager with the John E. Fogarty International Center (FIC) at the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), and am a federal employee. I have a Conflict of Interest (COI).

As recommended by user Spintendo, updating the November 21, 2019 request I submitted to respond to their concerns by providing additional explanation, providing additional references, and using appropriate templates. I do not understand the request to change the template's answer parameter; additional guidance is welcome. Thank you for your patience as I learn the proper etiquette.

Information to be added: In the "History" section, please add that Congress continues to appropriate funding for the Fogarty International Center (FIC), one of the 27 Institutes and Centers that make up the NIH, providing approximately $72.2 million in Fiscal Year 2017, $75.7 million in Fiscal Year 2018 and $78.1 million in Fiscal Year 2019.

Explanation of issue: Our organization's page does not reflect our funding status in the "History" section. Currently, paragraph 2 notes that "In March 2017, the Trump Administration proposed cuts to the NIH budget, including elimination of the Fogarty Center, saving $69 million." There is no mention of subsequent appropriations from Congress. The Center continues to receive funding. Please consider adding language about Congressional appropriations on fiscal years 2017, 2018 and/or 2019. Please note that the John E. Fogarty International Center (FIC) is one of the 27 Institutes and Centers that make up the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). The Center is often referred to in official government documentation, including NIH budget documentation, by the Center's acronym, FIC.

References supporting change: I included links to two additional documents showing congressional appropriations, along with clarification on the use of the Center's acronym FIC in official NIH budget documents.

A.Ellis 15:53, 26 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisap (talk • contribs) 15:53, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

I think a chart of this information showing all funding from 2000 would work best here. I'll start working on one and get back to you. Regards, Spintendo  16:13, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Acknowledged, thank you. Other NIH entities will likely appreciate having the data available.

Please note that, even with the chart, a narrative update to the history section would still help to add clarity. Possibly something like, "Congress continues to appropriate funding for the Fogarty International Center (FIC), one of the 27 Institutes and Centers that make up the NIH." A.Ellis 17:31, 26 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisap (talk • contribs)

Also, any thoughts you have on why it keeps noting that my comments are unsigned though I am very clearly signing them with the tildes, and can see the full username and time/date stamp, would be very useful. I keep reading the documentation and don't understand what I'm doing wrong. A.Ellis 17:39, 26 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellisap (talk • contribs)


 * With regards to the signature, you would have to check with the WP:HELPDESK to troubleshoot that. I have seen instances where an editor's configurations are preventing the tildes from working. As far as the suggested sentence, the wording of it as "continuing to fund" cannot be used because it refers to an infinite time period — that of the present — while articles should refer to finite time periods using the past tense in their prose when discussing past funding. If this is merely to offset the claim regarding the proposal to limit funding, that claim is only worded as a proposal, which does not imply that it was carried out. Regards, Spintendo  20:48, 26 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the guidance on the signature issue. The helpdesk helped me resolve it in my account settings.
 * Regarding the language, points noted. (I thought suggesting language would be helpful.) I'm open to any language, and welcome additions to the text in the history section that clarify that the "proposed cuts" were not implemented by Congress. The chart of appropriations looks good, and is helpful, but isn't necessarily obvious.
 * Ellisap (talk) 14:46, 27 December 2019 (UTC)