Talk:Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229232820/http://www.com.msu.edu/osteomed/welcome.html to http://www.com.msu.edu/osteomed/welcome.html
 * Added tag to http://www.do-phd.com.msu.edu/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229232827/http://www.com.msu.edu/osteomed/history.html to http://www.com.msu.edu/osteomed/history.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:03, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120610031628/http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=80661 to http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=80661

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Why notable alumni should not include Larry Nassar here, & only at the main MSU Wikipedia page
I guess there’s a character limit for edit explanation so my original reasoning was cut off, here’s the full thing: “ →‎Notable alumni: Removed Larry Nassar as a notable alumni. While it is true that is the school he attended, in the same way murderers should not be named to avoid sensationalizing them (see dontnamethem.org), that should also be the case for rapists and sexual abusers. Perhaps more importantly, it’s very unfair to current and future students of the medical school to continue to suffer damage to the reputation of their medical school because of one of the “notable alumni” who does not deserve to be named. The staff and students at MSUCOM absolutely abhor and condemn him, and great changes have been made so that it never happens again. There are entire lectures on consent and the necessity of having a chaperone in the room during sensitive physical exams. The medical students want nothing to do with him, did not choose to be associated with the same school, and even have an organization dedicated to women and raises awareness for sexual abuse. If the removal is against Wikipedia rules or I am not being impartial enough, then I will not object to a reversion, but I am right about the unfairness of reputation damage to students graduating long after he did.”

I’d also like to point out that the scandal is discussed at great length in the main Wikipedia article for Michigan State University and does not bear repeating here. If someone went to MSU, people do not avoid doing business with them because of Larry Nassar. But if someone went to MSUCOM, and people look up this Wikipedia article as part of their decision for who they want as their doctor, they may decide to avoid all graduates of MSUCOM due to a fear that they or their children will be abused. Thus you can see why it’s good enough that Larry Nassar & accomplices are discussed on the main MSU article and does not need to be mentioned here, it doesn’t hurt MSU students but it does hurt MSUCOM students.

Thanks for taking the time to hear me out! Again if I’m wrong for it, I have no objection to having the article reverted, but in that case there should be due diligence and the pertinent reasoning should be stated. If reasoning is left blank then I will remove it again. Petwikdibra (talk) 20:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've reverted your removal of this person (I hadn't heard of him before, so don't have a bias). There is no Wikipedia policy saying that criminals should not be named, and it feels as if you are trying to right wrongs here. I would suggest that if there are reliable sources discussing the responses of the staff and students at MSUCOM to his crimes, it would be worth adding them to this article to make the points you've made above about how the institution has changed and its attitude to him. Tacyarg (talk) 22:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I see you repeatedly say there's no Wikipedia policy reason to remove him, but is there a policy reason for him to remain? If not, how do we put an end to this back and forth? It appears he has been added and removed dozens of times since he was first added in 2018, which implies ongoing disagreement as to whether or not he is to be considered notable. 24.192.170.28 (talk) 06:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for you contribution to wikipedia. While I am personally sympathetic to the rationale behind dontnamethem, it is not a part of wikipedia policy. If you wish to advocate for a policy or guideline change in Wikipedia, this talk page is not necessarily where to start.


 * I hear your concerns regarding the unfair effects of Nassar's actions on the MSU community, current student body, and alum. We should avoid portraying the school with negative bias, which is a risk due to the abundant available coverage on this topic. The best way to mitigate this would be to catalog (with quality references) the actions taken by the university to prevent any future such occurrences. Ultimately though, Wikipedia is not the place to right any wrongs; it is an online encyclopedia, which is meant to provide good quality information based on reliable references.


 * The simple fact of frequent edit reversions is not itself evidence supporting controversy or uncertainty. Of note, frequent edit revisions often occurs when editors are motivated by bias or conflicts of interest, even when the disputed content is clear. The point is, any argument must stand on its own two legs.


 * Rytyho usa (talk) 06:31, 4 May 2023 (UTC)