User talk:Jmatlick

Welcome!
Hello, Jmatlick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  19:37, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Thanks for pointing this out to me! I'm often in San Diego. I'm not scheduled to be there in October but I will definitely attend part of the conference if that changes. Jmatlick (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for all the good communication and collaboration at Benaroya Research Institute. I regret to say that other obligations are making me less available for reviews, and that I should encourage you to seek the same sort of collaboration from other Wikipedia contributors. Here are some options for getting other review: I have been editing Wikipedia for a lot of years and have seen thousands of people try to edit on behalf of organizations. You are 1 in 500 at least - it is very rare for anyone to offer small bits of info at a time backed by sources and it is nice to see you do this. Because it is so uncommon to see anyone actually follow the stated rules, the Wikipedia community is unprepared to respond to someone like you who actually does everything they are supposed to do. I am not sure I have ever seen anyone else come with good behavior as you have, and I wish there were a way for you to get fast turnaround. Behind the scenes there is a complicated network of quid pro quo. It is complicated in the sense that people who know each other often refrain from helping each other, however, people keep track of who is contributing to the pool of shared community assistance. The quid pro quo is in place informally to give faster support to people who assist others and propagate the cycle. If you wanted the fastest possible turnaround for review, then you might consider either reviewing the work of others perhaps in the same pool of commercial editors or perhaps in any field of your interest, like for example medicine. There is an endless queue of requests at the conflict of interest board and if Benaroya ever became interested in sharing health information instead of only information about themselves, then a lot of support is available at WP:MED. But overall - I cannot say what you might do, or how you could get a quick response. Thanks for having these exchanges with me. I can support in other ways if you ask, but for the present please find another reviewer to start checking your work. Be bold and as anywhere on wiki for support with my encouragement. If you want to talk about things other than routine review, then I might discuss another topic. It has been fun to now - thanks.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  17:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Using Request edit is the standard way for representatives of organizations to request review. The turnaround time might take weeks.
 * 2) The documentation for what editors like you is at Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, with steps for engagement being the most relevant part.
 * 3) You might ask at WikiProject Medicine or explore other WikiProjects
 * 4) I think nothing else obvious exists.


 * Thanks for your kind words. I know it's not your fault, but this is disappointing as we are really trying to do things the right way. I will start trying to build my Wikipedia network so I have other editors who can help. In the meantime, what do you think is the least offensive way to update the Benaroya page? I am considering posting the edits myself, with citations. If I do this, is there a way to invite editors' feedback after the fact? I want to do this with integrity, but I honestly can't tell my clients that it will potentially take weeks for each individual edit. In that case, they will just likely go back to editing pages on their own, which is the worst case for everyone in the long run IMO. What do you think? Thanks again for all your help and advice on this. Jmatlick (talk) 23:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)