| Revision as of 14:12, 17 June 2024 editMrHaligonian (talk | contribs)120 edits →June 2024: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:18, 17 June 2024 edit undoFram (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors247,059 edits ReplyNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| :Hello @], | :Hello @], | ||
| :This is the full section you removed: | :This is the full section you removed: | ||
| :"Medical misconduct that is not covered by a university or health authority is addressed by the province's College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia (CPSNS). One of the most infamous cases involved a psychiatrist, Dr. Curtis Steele, who had his licence revoked after an investigation concluded that he had taken nude photographs of a 14-year-old female patient he was treating in 2003<ref>{{Cite news |title=Curtis Steele loses psychiatry licence over nude photo allegations |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/curtis-steele-loses-psychiatry-licence-over-nude-photo-allegations-1.2708371}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Former Halifax psychiatrist Curtis Steele facing child porn charges |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/former-halifax-psychiatrist-curtis-steele-facing-child-porn-charges-1.3066270}}</ref>. The female patient had delayed making a complaint until September 2013, at which time Dr. Steele gave up his licence to practice medicine as a result of the conclusions of the CPSNS Hearing Committee and he subsequently stopped teaching at Dalhousie University<ref>{{Cite web |title=Settlement Agreement Dr. Curtis Steele |url=https://cpsns.ns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Settlement-Agreement-Dr.-Curtis-Steele.pdf}}</ref>. '''He was charged with a child pornography offence and was due to stand trial in 2017, however the young woman was "visibly shaken when she saw the accused walk into the waiting area outside the courtroom" and refused to testify, leading to the child porn charges against Dr. Steele being withdrawn. The crown prosecutor noted that whether or not Dr. Steele had taken the photos was not in dispute, as this was proven in the CPSNS investigation. The trial was specifically to determine whether the photos taken were for a sexual purpose and therefore met the definition of child pornography<ref>{{Cite news |title=Child porn charges withdrawn against Halifax psychiatrist Curtis Steele |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/curtis-arlo-steele-psychiatrist-patient-child-pornography-1.3958221}}</ref>. Dr. Steele did not face any jail time and he passed away with his wife in 2024.''' His obituary still described him as a lifelong physician who had spent his life devoted to mental well-being and "innovative mental health modalities", ending with the statement, "Curtis was an avid lifelong photographer with an incredible eye."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Curtis Steele Obituary (1933-2024) - Baton Rouge, LA - The Advocate |url=https://obits.theadvocate.com/us/obituaries/theadvocate/name/curtis-steele-obituary?id=54254841 |access-date=2024-06-13 |website=Legacy.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Curtis Arlo Steele Obituary - Saltwire |url=https://www.saltwire.com/halifax/obituaries/curtis-arlo-steele-97048/ |access-date=2024-06-17 |website=Saltwire.com}}</ref>" | |||
| :Please look at the CPSNS settlement agreement at https://cpsns.ns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Settlement-Agreement-Dr.-Curtis-Steele.pdf | :Please look at the CPSNS settlement agreement at https://cpsns.ns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Settlement-Agreement-Dr.-Curtis-Steele.pdf | ||
| :I can understand if you wish to remove the part I just bolded above - that would be meeting your comment about "extremely negative claims based on the prosecution". However, given that the fact of taking nude photos of a minor was proven in an investigation conducted by CPSNS, and they held a judicial process (Hearing Committee) that determined he was to have his licence to practice medicine revoked, and this made national news, what would be your rationale for removing the entire section and not simply the part about unproven charges? Can we find a compromise where we agree to simply remove the bolded part and restore the section? Is there an admin we can tag who can adjudicate this dispute and decide if the entire section need be removed or only the part about withdraw child porn charges? ] (]) 14:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC) | :I can understand if you wish to remove the part I just bolded above - that would be meeting your comment about "extremely negative claims based on the prosecution". However, given that the fact of taking nude photos of a minor was proven in an investigation conducted by CPSNS, and they held a judicial process (Hearing Committee) that determined he was to have his licence to practice medicine revoked, and this made national news, what would be your rationale for removing the entire section and not simply the part about unproven charges? Can we find a compromise where we agree to simply remove the bolded part and restore the section? Is there an admin we can tag who can adjudicate this dispute and decide if the entire section need be removed or only the part about withdraw child porn charges? ] (]) 14:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| ::BLP applies to every page. Reposting the removed content here is not a wise move. And all we have is one doctor removed for alleged serious misconduct, not really well placed in an article about systematic, widespread issues. It just makes it look like a ] where a frankly minor (as in, individual) case is included to either make the general issues seem bigger, or to attack that doctor. ] (]) 14:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == "]" listed at ] == | == "]" listed at ] == | ||
Revision as of 14:18, 17 June 2024
June 2024
Hello, I'm Chaotic Enby. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nova Scotia Health Authority, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Please do not add content or create pages that exist solely to attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Misplaced Pages and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Thank you. Extremely negative claims based on the prosecution, not on a conviction, are not allowed on Misplaced Pages (WP:BLP, also applies to the recently deceased). Please don't reinsert the information again. Fram (talk) 14:01, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @Fram,
- This is the full section you removed:
- Please look at the CPSNS settlement agreement at https://cpsns.ns.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Settlement-Agreement-Dr.-Curtis-Steele.pdf
- I can understand if you wish to remove the part I just bolded above - that would be meeting your comment about "extremely negative claims based on the prosecution". However, given that the fact of taking nude photos of a minor was proven in an investigation conducted by CPSNS, and they held a judicial process (Hearing Committee) that determined he was to have his licence to practice medicine revoked, and this made national news, what would be your rationale for removing the entire section and not simply the part about unproven charges? Can we find a compromise where we agree to simply remove the bolded part and restore the section? Is there an admin we can tag who can adjudicate this dispute and decide if the entire section need be removed or only the part about withdraw child porn charges? MrHaligonian (talk) 14:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- BLP applies to every page. Reposting the removed content here is not a wise move. And all we have is one doctor removed for alleged serious misconduct, not really well placed in an article about systematic, widespread issues. It just makes it look like a WP:COATRACK where a frankly minor (as in, individual) case is included to either make the general issues seem bigger, or to attack that doctor. Fram (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
"Harassment in Nova Scotia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Harassment in Nova Scotia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 17 § Harassment in Nova Scotia until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 14:03, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
"Bullying in Nova Scotia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Bullying in Nova Scotia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 17 § Bullying in Nova Scotia until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
"Discrimination in Nova Scotia" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Discrimination in Nova Scotia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 17 § Discrimination in Nova Scotia until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)