User talk:Owain.davies: Difference between revisions
Sunray Major (talk | contribs) |
Sunray Major (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
Thanks for the feedback. Your point is well taken. I thought about creating a seperate entry for the Queensland Ambulance but will involve some of my serving colleagues. I'll start putting some work together to an entry on emergency services in Australia. |
Thanks for the feedback. Your point is well taken. I thought about creating a seperate entry for the Queensland Ambulance but will involve some of my serving colleagues. I'll start putting some work together to an entry on emergency services in Australia. |
||
I'm getting the hang of this. Got adding links down now. Still working on links to references though. [[Sunray Major]] – |
I'm getting the hang of this. Got adding links down now. Still working on links to references though. [[Sunray Major]] – 17:19 AEST 17.06.2007 |
||
Revision as of 07:19, 17 June 2007
| Owain Davies' Talk Page |
|---|
| Welcome to my user talk page! You're probably here because I've done something you don't like. Sorry about that. I can assure you it was in good faith! Let me know what it was, and let's see if we can't reach an agreement! Go on, I'm very hard to offend, but don't take that as a challenge... |
| I try and keep this page quite clear so i can see new edits easily, but I'm an open sort of guy, and I don't delete comments I don't like, so if you'd like to, you can see my previous user discussion in my discussion archive |
Preview
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Ambulance, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. If you're worried about losing your edits, do what I do. I copy the entire contents of the edit window to my clipboard just before I click preview (or save for that matter). Your edits the article are really good, by the way. Thanks for making Wikipedia better! —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 19:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
AWP
While I don't disagree with the "How to" removal of large parts of the AWP article, I do disagree strongly with you deleting the cherry-picker article and replacing it with a redirect. Wikipedia is not paper - when a good subarticle exists, it should not be deleted just to be integrated into the general article. That would only apply for rather trivial subjects. Cheers. MadMaxDog 07:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Answered your comment on my page. Cheers.MadMaxDog 07:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Ambulance photo
I'm curious why you felt the need to remove my picture of an air ambulance (Image:Helimed5.jpg) and replace it with another that does not appear to add anything to the article or to be of superior quality to my photo. My pictures been on the Ambulance page for quite a while now and I rather liked it being there! Unless you can give me a good reason for replacing it, could you put it back please.scancoaches 14:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem
I like to tidy up things. IPSOS (talk) 12:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
Thanks for the barnstar. It's my first. :-) IPSOS (talk) 17:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- You deserve it Owain.davies 21:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
You recreated the article even before I had finished deleting it (the talk page was still there)! That was fast! :D I had to run some errands, so couldnt reply earlier, sorry about that.
Anyways, coming back to the article, even though it is in a much better shape now, it still does not assert notability, not at least the way it is expected here. As I already mentioned, it has to show multiple (at least two) instances of coverage by mainstream media (a non-blog, non-forum, non-wiki website or even magazine or newspaper will do). The BBC article is fine, a couple of more should get you on the safe side. Plus, it would be best if you can provide any claim to fame that distinguishes it from other similar organizations.
Apart from that, the article still reads like a promotional material for the organization. Sentences like "BASICS members are used to provide extra skills at the scene of major incidents, or for particularly difficult patients" and "The ambulance service trusts provides a high standard of care", appear to be vaunting and thus not neutral. These little details are what diminishes the quality of an article.
Since it does assert partial notability, and because it is under development, I am not slapping any ugly tags on the article. But it clearly needs a lot of work, I will be keeping an eye out. Feel free to contact me for any assistance you might require. All the best, both of you. --soum talk 17:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback
Hi Owain, Thanks for the feedback. Your point is well taken. I thought about creating a seperate entry for the Queensland Ambulance but will involve some of my serving colleagues. I'll start putting some work together to an entry on emergency services in Australia.
I'm getting the hang of this. Got adding links down now. Still working on links to references though. Sunray Major – 17:19 AEST 17.06.2007