This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk | contribs) at 09:45, 7 January 2022 (→Ladapo site:uclahealth.org: Fixing style/layout errors; Reply;). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:45, 7 January 2022 by 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk | contribs) (→Ladapo site:uclahealth.org: Fixing style/layout errors; Reply;)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. | Upload |
"Multiple issues" tags
Bodding, why did you add these tags to the top of the article? Llll5032 (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't have a dog in the fight, but the negative 'sources' seem to be opinion pieces and not genuine balanced pieces that look at all sides. Note well, I did not delete anything, though I believe the grouping of these "comments" are WP:OR and are selective by the editor and meant to craft a biased narrative. This is not what Misplaced Pages is meant to be in a WP:BLP. Hence, my tagging this. Bodding (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bodding, thanks for responding. Which of the 18 cited sources are opinion pieces? Llll5032 (talk) 17:04, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- I suggest that the templates should be removed per WP:WTRMT #3, #7 and #8, because a specific problem to solve has not been adequately identified. Any individual unreliable sources should be identified with inline tags instead. Llll5032 (talk) 04:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- The maintenance template is deleted now. Llll5032 (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- I disagree. The template is there for all editors who happen upon the page. I read the article, I researched the sources and based on WP:BLP, I added the template. I'm happy to post an RFC, but I think the best way forward is to allow the template to remain. There was never a need to remove it. Bodding (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bodding, which of the sources cited in the article were opinion pieces? Llll5032 (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
- According to WP:RS WP:RSEDITORIAL, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (invited op-eds and letters to the editor from notable figures) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author...." So editorials are WP:RS, if they include opinions, even subjective, of other medical professionals about Ladapo's qualifications and competence. They're also acceptable if they contain facts that have been confirmed elsewhere. It may be that the problem with Ladapo is that there is a lot of documented negative information about him, but not much documented positive information. If he said that he spent a week taking care of COVID-19 patients, but that wasn't confirmed by the hospital records, it doesn't sound good, but you can't leave it out. --Nbauman (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
- WP:BLPBALANCE generally limits the use of opinions in BLP articles to those mentioned by secondary sources. But Bodding hasn't yet identified anything specific in this article that violates that policy. Llll5032 (talk) 07:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- According to WP:RS WP:RSEDITORIAL, "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (invited op-eds and letters to the editor from notable figures) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author...." So editorials are WP:RS, if they include opinions, even subjective, of other medical professionals about Ladapo's qualifications and competence. They're also acceptable if they contain facts that have been confirmed elsewhere. It may be that the problem with Ladapo is that there is a lot of documented negative information about him, but not much documented positive information. If he said that he spent a week taking care of COVID-19 patients, but that wasn't confirmed by the hospital records, it doesn't sound good, but you can't leave it out. --Nbauman (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bodding, which of the sources cited in the article were opinion pieces? Llll5032 (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
- I disagree. The template is there for all editors who happen upon the page. I read the article, I researched the sources and based on WP:BLP, I added the template. I'm happy to post an RFC, but I think the best way forward is to allow the template to remain. There was never a need to remove it. Bodding (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
- The maintenance template is deleted now. Llll5032 (talk) 15:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Boston Globe article
Here's the Boston Globe article, which among other things gives the opinions of many people who knew or worked with Ladapo. The Miami Herald article is behind a paywall.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/09/23/metro/six-things-you-should-know-about-dr-joseph-ladapo-floridas-new-surgeon-general-his-controversial-views-vaccines-mandates/
Six things you should know about Dr. Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s new surgeon general, and his controversial views on vaccines and mandates
By Travis Andersen
Boston Globe
September 23, 2021
“I’m speechless,” tweeted Dr. Uché Blackstock, founder of Advancing Health Equity, in response to the Herald article. “I attended medical school with Dr. Joseph Ladapo and to say I’m shocked by his opposition to mask and vaccine mandates is an understatement. I could have never imagined this news.”
That sort of messaging has distressed many in public health, including Dr. Nida Qadir, an associate professor of medicine and associate director of the Medical Intensive Care Unit at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. Ladapo taught previously at UCLA as well.
“He’s expressed a lot of strange views since the beginning of the pandemic,” Qadir tweeted. “I don’t know him personally, but it’s been especially shocking considering the state LA was in this past winter. Can’t say I’m not happy he’s leaving CA but sorry for the people of FL.”
Dr. Michael F. Ozaki, a retired pediatrician living in Southern California, was even more blunt in his assessment of Ladapo.
“He is a public health danger, and must be portrayed as such,” Ozaki tweeted Tuesday.
Dr. Nina L. Shapiro, an author and associate professor at David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, where Ladapo taught as well, tweeted that his views align ”more with #DeSantis than with @UCLAHealth.”
--Nbauman (talk) 19:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Immunity forever!
Science-Based Medicine: "Florida Surgeon General declares single positive COVID test proves immunity forever" --Hob Gadling (talk) 13:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Ladapo site:*.*
- https://twitter.com/docmosho/status/1440869870397235201
- search: "Ladapo" site:nyu.edu
- search: "Ladapo" site:uclahealth.org ... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)