Talk:Mayo Clinic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Minnesota This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of high-importance within Minnesota articles.

This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Famous patients

Why the list of famous patients? I'd prefer to see a list of famous doctors, trainees, or medical students. Evry top 20 hospital could boast of its many famous patients: everyone gets sick...

I agree somewhat, although to be fair Mayo is known for treating a disproportionate amount of the worlds rich and famous, in fact its probably the only city that has a downtown almost entirely devoted to serving these patients. Rochester itself has a large temporary population that seeks care at the clinic (more than the cities resident population). Gtadoc 04:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the list belongs in a "History of Mayo Clinic" sibling article rather than on the main page.--Daveswagon 16:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mayo Clinic diet

ehhhh.. Why is there a link to the 'mayo clinic diet' here? It's something which has no connection(bar the obvious one)to the Mayo Clinic. I've deleted it before but it was put back.

Helminski 02:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)Well, speaking as the Mayo Clinic's former trademark attorney, I think it's important to keep the mention in as long as it's made clear that the diet is bogus. Even Mayo's own website mentions it because the supposed diet keeps circulating all over the place and refuses to die. Many people have heard of this diet, and should be reminded that it's a fraud.

It's not Wikipedia's purpose to defend an organization's branding scheme or expose fraud.--Daveswagon 16:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps not, but it is noteworthy. That said, the best way to dispel the myth might be to not mention it at all. My only concern (knowing nothing specific about the diet) being that people would potentially put their health at risk following something they believe to be backed by legitimate health professionals. Gtadoc 20:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyrighted source

Ugh, this text appears to have been lifted from a copyrighted source (just a fragment, though).

  • The above comment is old, from May 27, 2003 —Mulad (talk) 20:28, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "World renowned"

I suspect that "world renowned" is a bit of an overstatement. "Renowned in the United States" would probably be more accurate. David.Monniaux 11:43, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. People fly from all over the world just to go to the Mayo Clinic. -- DarkNight 15:47, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
True, especially before 9/11 folks were coming from all over, and especially the Mideast.
I agree, world renowned is accurate, in fact the international airport at Rochester existed so that people, particularly from the ME, could fly directly there to get medical care at Mayo. In my personal experience its also recognized by name in many foreign countries, some I didn't expect (India, Pakistan, China, Thailand, Cambodia from my own experience). Gtadoc 18:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, I removed a reference to Johns Hopkins, seemed a bit tacky to have them advertising there; also interesting they don't want any mention of Mayo on their page and for same reason I don't think it needs to be listed here.

[edit] Carillon

They also have a 56-bell carillon in the Plummer bldg.[1][2][3] (This page says 23 but it may simply be decades out of date; there seems to have been an expansion.[4]) The bells were made by Petit & Fritsen[5] and Gillett & Johnston[6]. Kwantus 02:55, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)

[edit] infobox

If anyone has time can you put the information about how many patients, how much grant money, etc. etc. in an info box? Might be a better way to list it than in the article. If not I'll try to figure out how to do it. Gtadoc 17:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pop culture section

Unencyclopedic and unworthy of an article about one of the world's best hospitals. I don't understand why these trivial sections show up so often. MoodyGroove 00:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove

[edit] Entered by the Mayo's P.R. Dept?

The Mayo Clinic entry is so sycophantic that it almost seems as though it has been written by the Mayo Clinic's public relations department. In the interests of the Wiki dictum that articles should be neutral maybe a few references to a some of the Mayo's peccadillos should be included? WikiUserisme (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right. {{}}

Provide reliable sources which detail the criticisms, and you'll be fine. Corvus cornixtalk 23:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

So far as Wikipedia is concerned, apparently the Wall Street Journal and the U.S. Dept of Justice aren't "reliable sources." I posted links to a WSJ article about a Mayo Clinic patent and a U.S. Dept. of Justice account where the Mayo was fined $6.5 million for misapplying a taxpayer grant. They were edited out. Seems like a double standard. Is the Mayo Clinic a Wiki benefactor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiUserisme (talk • contribs) 13:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You didn't add the links to those sources as a reasonable edit to the article, you added a polemic which had to be removed. If you want to create a section on Criticisms, list the criticisms in an encyclopedic manner, and add those sources that way, that would be fine. Corvus cornixtalk 16:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to remove some of the "PRness" the article has at the moment. BJTalk 22:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, BJ. You did a good job. It'll be interesting to see if the Mayo Clinic P.R. people (I read that the Mayo calls them "The Dept of External Affairs")try and sneak some puffery back into it. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiUserisme (talk • contribs) 17:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to create a criticism section.* And I didn't want to criticise the Mayo Clinic. Anyone with access to a computer can find out for themselves that, just like everyone else and every other organisation on the planet, the Mayo Clinic has skeletons in its closets. It is more that I wanted to criticise Wikipedia for allowing what I thought was a just a syrupy sales puff piece for the Mayo Clinic rather than a scholarly encyclopedic statement. It was so blatant that IMO it was written by some Mayo Clinic P.R. hack. A sort of amalgam of their sales brochures.

  • If you start having criticism sections couldn't it lead to anyone with an axe to grind about the subject of any entry having a field day? I'd be interested in the opinions of others as to whether or not they think your suggestion about a criticism section has merit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiUserisme (talk • contribs) 17:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I don't think a criticism section is needed at this time, Mayo doesn't really receive enough criticism that would merit it. BJTalk 17:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Split?

Mayo owns a dizzying amount of property and this article doesn't (and can't) properly describe them all. Right now the article seems to focus on Rochester and doesn't say much of anything about the actual hospitals. I think this article should cover Mayo the foundation and 3 article should be broken off for the three hospitals. (Mayo Building being one?) Comments? BJTalk 23:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe there should be an article on Mayo Health System which addresses all of those other sites. Right now it's just a redirect to here. Corvus cornixtalk 17:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the clinics but aren't hospitals "notable by default"? BJTalk 18:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)