User talk:Emrgmgmtca

Welcome!

Hello, Emrgmgmtca, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Andvd (talk) 12:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)Andvd[reply]

I have seen your edits around Wikipedia and I feel like you would be a great addition to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Emergency medicine and EMS task force. We can always use more editors to help with improvement of EMS and emergency medicine related articles!

The article Emergency medical service is the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Emergency medicine and EMS task force collaboration of the month/ Good Article (GA) drive. We hope you take an interest and help with improvement!.

• I noticed you have written a very nice section on Paramedic, one of the articles I watch and have been trying to edit on a regular basis. Myself and a couple of other editors have created a EMS and emergency medicine related wiki project and would love input. Out 1st goal is to get Emergency medical services to Wikipedia:Good articles and then to FA class. Would love any help you can contribute as I lack the quality writing skills you have. thanks for your time Medicellis (talk) 14:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Medic Barnstar
		excellent work on Paramedic

• thanks for the time/effort put into the Paramedic page, great work!

Hi there,

I've replied to your comments on my talk page (and moved the comment to the bottom) OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 14:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there ;). Are you aware that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that must be followed? Unfortunatly, though your recent work to the EMS articles is commendable, the formatting and manual of style is pretty poor. I've 'repaired' the main damage done (namely I've removed level 1 headings, decapitalised all but the first word of all headings, deleted empty headings, and formatted external links correctly), but could I please urge you to go and take a look at WP:MOS, and follow it in the future? Cheers ;). _TalkIslander 22:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a quick note about this comment - please be aware that nobody owns any articles on Wikipedia, and I can confirm that OwainDavies is well aware of this. Looking at his comment, unfortunatly he's quite right. I can't stress enough that the work you've done to date is very commendable and valuable, but you must realise that on Wikipedia we have various policies and guidelines that should be followed, one (big) one of which is the manual of style. _TalkIslander 22:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Islander! I will familiarize myself with the Style Guide of course. There's so much in here that doesn't seem meet any kind of style standard that I decided to just go at it from an academic approach, in order to try to clean it up. As you have probably figured out, I'm new to Wikipedia (but not to writing or to the subjects that I write about), and just trying to work things through. I'd welcome any other advice that you might have...please feel free to look at what I post from time to time, and offer suggestions! With respect to the other situation, I suppose that I was just a little frustrated at having two hours' worth of work undone three minutes after it was posted, without any sort of discussion. The only discussion occurred after I objected. I guess that's how it works here. Cheers. Emrgmgmtca (talk) 10:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunatly yes, that often is how it works here. Bear in mind that 9 in every 10 edits made here is unfortunatly not constructive, and needs to be reverted. Because of this, the general method of dealing with a questionable edit is to revert and then check carefully to see whether it was made in good faith or not. This is far from the ideal method, but is unfortunatly what is done more often than not. The response you got from OwainDavies actually ties in quite well with the first point you make above - you're quite right in pointing out that many articles don't follow our MoS carefully, hence editors try hard to rectify this, which can result in good-faith work such as your own being undone quickly. It's unfortunate, but there's not really any way around it. _TalkIslander 10:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{WPMED}} is a talk page banner, and thus should be placed on the talk page instead of the article page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedias, and wikis in general, are not usually considered reliable sources because they can be changed so easily by anyone. It's probably better than nothing, but it would be better to find a proper reliable source. Perhaps a government website? (If the French wikipedia had cited its sources, then you could use that instead, but they don't seem to have done that yet.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As it happens, I do most of the assessments for WPMED; congratulations on your latest promotion.

BTW, you don't have to add the {{not done}} template; the people that watch that page will figure it out. That template is largely used to signal that something has been languishing on the list for lack of a suitable expert. (Nothing wrong with adding it, but it's not necessary if you want to save yourself a little extra time and typing.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you have been doing a tremendous amount of work I would like to thank and congratulate you!!! keep up the good work. I have been away for a while due to studying for school as I have very big and expensive test next week. I hope to be on after the test more and look over the pages you have done and re-worked.....again good job! Medicellis (talk) 23:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on all of the EMS by country articles. I'd like to discuss the use of infoboxes on the articles, so I'd appriciate if you would comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Emergency medicine and EMS task force#Infoboxes on Emergency medical services by country articles. Thanks. --Scott Alter 16:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done!

Thanks for your kind note today. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to make sure you knew that you were authorized to fix obvious errors in WPMED assessments without consulting anyone. I just updated the EMS in the United States article from Stub to C (see the comments), and it clearly shouldn't have been rated stub! Here's a quick rule of thumb for the lower grades (and you know where to find the more detailed rules):

• Stub: Less than ten sentences. If you feel like it, an image or a good reference or other element can count as a "sentence" for this purpose.
• Start: Ten or more sentences, but still obviously incomplete -or- Not quite ten sentences, but there's really nothing else to say on the subject [happens to a lot of obscure anatomy articles].
• C: Ten or more sentences plus at least one section header (not counting things like "References" or "External links") and at least one reference.

Even if you've done all the work on an article, you should feel free to self-rate these levels, and to correct ratings at any other WPMED article you ever see. If we're really lucky, the ratings on any given article will be reviewed once every year or two, so any extra pair of eyes is welcome. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Emrgmgmtca. I'd be happy to copyedit for you - especially since I am an EMT, this will be fun! I'll take a look at it now, and I should be able to finish a copyedit by, say, the end of the week-ish, assuming nothing in my non-wiki life goes haywire in the meantime. Just to double-check - the article is Emergency medical services in the United States? keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 13:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the correct article, and thanks a million for your help! Also as an EMT, you might also be interested in having a read (but I won't ask you to copyedit) of the other ten articles (U.K. isn't done yet!) in the series, just out of interest. Thanks again. Cheers Emrgmgmtca (talk) 14:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've finished my copyedit. Before turning it loose to be evaluated again, you should probably give it a quick look over to make sure I a) didn't overlook anything duh-worthy (I just caught myself almost saving an edit that said something like "and its' friends") and b) didn't run any sentences into the ground when trying to clarify them. Better safe than sorry, you know? keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was wondering if you had some free time if you could copy/edit my EMD page that I created. It was deleted under WP:PROD but I contested it and it was re-instated. I included alot of references in the article but for some reasons, someone thought it did not have enough content. Emergency Medical Disptaching has become a large part of the US EMS system and is used in most Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system that dispatch both FIRE/EMS/POLICE. You have done a wonderful job of expanded on alot of articles I have copy/edited so I was hoping to request you help here! thanks in advance Medicellis (talk) 23:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll have a look at it. It's an important subject! We use it here too, so I actually have local expertise that I can consult. Our dispatch centre were just named a Centre of Excellence not long ago. Hope the work on the exam is going well for you! Good luck! Emrgmgmtca (talk) 09:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo -- the article was deleted originally because all of the references failed WP:RS, and the article itself seemed to center around the EMD "certification" from one company. I'm glad to see someone was able to resuscitate it. (Charging... clear!) //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 15:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That was my first rescue in here! Medicellis...I'm done with it, and pretty pleased myself. I've re-evaluated it as a 'C' but asked for an additional reevaluation...I think it meets the 'B' standard now, but I'm reluctant to evaluate my own work that highly. Hope youre pleased with this...let me know what you think! Emrgmgmtca (talk) 15:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the contact. When IP vandalism occurs, we try to give sufficient feedback before temporarily blocking. When we do block an IP, it is temporary and a block of anonymous blockers only. Thus you, as a signed in editor are safe and welcome to edit even though a block on the IP has been put in place. I hope this clarifies things. Happy editing, Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 12:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome; it's nice of you to respond. It's an interesting and important topic, but I think the article is still too repetitive and wordy in places; paring down wouldn't hurt. And it is very US-centric. (I know, I know: the article I'm presently working on is like that, too.)

FYI: Norway (not an EU country) some years back discussed emergency numbers. 9-1-1 was considered, as everyone who watches American movies knows that one. For some reason the result was: Fire: 1-1-0, Police: 1-1-2 and Ambulance: 1-1-3. Of course, in an emergency, no one can remember all that. Most people just remember that 1-1-1 is not one of them and try ± 1. I called 1-1-3 once and got all flustered when the guy answered "Emergency Helicopter". He had to talk me into not hanging up. (Neighbor with broken hip didn't need a helicopter.) It's important work, and they sure have to keep their wits about them.

BTW, since it's so US-centric, why do you use the spelling 'centre'? --Hordaland (talk) 17:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't really as US-centric as has been suggested...at least, not deliberately. The certification of Emergency Medical Dispatcher is purely a U.S. invention...it developed and grew there, all of the standards were created, and are still controlled from there, by Jeff Clawson and the folks who brought you AMPDS. It is VERY MUCH an American 'thing', which has been successfully exported elsewhere, including an impressive list of countries at this point. In the history portion, I know the evolution of medical dispatching and emergency numbers in the U.S. and Canada, and am sincerely hoping that if there are significant differences elsewhere, other Wikipedians will jump in and add them. I've already included the process in France, because I happened to know that, and photos from Finland, Germany and South Africa, primarily because I was trying to minimize the US-centric 'feel' of the article. It's something that I am extremely conscious of! BTW the reason that I use 'centre' is that I am Canadian, and also went to grad school in the U.K.. And trust me, if you think this is US-centric, try living next door to them!!! I get 500 television channels, 350 of which are American! Waving our flag has become a national obsession here!!! Thanks again! Emrgmgmtca (talk) 17:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I took the excellent work you did and got the article to GA status. I did have to redo a lot of your formatting and do some copyediting, but the bulk of the work was done by you and other previous editors. Your attention to the article prompted me to make the nomination and final changes, and you should be considered a significant contributor to this article's GA achievement. Jclemens (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

copied from my talk, in case you're not watching that...

Ok, after a quick read, it looks like I should be able to get 9-1-1 copyedited...maybe within two weeks? I'd say a week, but real life's a little quirky lately. I'll get started probably tonight or tomorrow. And hey, thanks for asking me - I always like to see a repeat customer ;) keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 21:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking about WP:EMS recently. I'm halfway tempted to redirect WT:EMS to UT:Medicellis, because that's the page where I can actually find out what's going on with EMS-related articles. I very much do not want to disrupt your relationship with any editor, but I know you're interested in having a functional EMS task force, so here's an unsolicited suggestion:

If you're posting something that might have general interest, you might consider putting it on the EMS task force's talk page instead of, or in addition to, an individual editor's talk page. Communication between members about what they've been doing and what needs to be done is why the task force has a talk page. This sort of "I exist, and I'm working on something" message can be really critical to small projects, because it reminds people about the task force's existence and also makes it possible for more than two editors to work together.

Free advice is often worth exactly what you paid for it, so feel free to ignore this if you want. Cheers, WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was over a year ago. You are affected by this deletion: [1]. Conscious (talk) 14:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the inactivity, Im about finished with RN school and I accepted a Management position at the ambulance company I work for as training and education officer, and assistant Director of Operations. So needless to say I haven't had much time to breath let alone, have fun on wiki.....my wife has been hounding me just to spend time with the little ones. I take my last RN class on the 8th and will finally be ready to take my nursing boards. I hope to take the nursing boards in Jan. After that I will have more time, mabe....I have to decide were my career is going. I neeed to choose my field I guess. EMS unfortunatly has no pay comparied with the nursing field, but I need the management experience. I accepted a full-ride scholorship from the hospital I work part-time and now "owe" them 2 years of work or pay them back 8k for titution they paid for. So again I apologize for my lack of activity.....soon I hope to have more time Medicellis (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi. i understand that some systems have drivers and medics, but that doesnt change the fact that medics (and any other medical personnel on ambulances) find the term, ambulance driver, to be derogatory when it refers to them. i worked for an all als system where we employed emt-basics to mostly drive. they assisted us on scene and we split driving to calls, but when it came to transporting a patient the emt-b was the one driving. in spite of this, nobody who knows better would call them ambulance drivers. they still assisted in pt care. see my point? Brendan19 (talk) 19:55, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please respond to me here- its more clear to talk on one page. as for npov, i am quite aware of what it means. it is not, as you said, no point of view... it is neutral point of view. the following is a direct quote from the policy, "Article content should clearly describe, represent, and characterise disputes within topics, but without endorsement of any particular point of view. Articles should provide background on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular; detailed articles might also contain evaluations of each viewpoint, but must studiously refrain from taking sides."

when i said that medics find the term, ambulance driver, to be offensive i did not violate npov. it is true that it is offensive to a great deal of people and if i added the caveat of "in the usa" it would be more correct. what you pointed out is that my statement doesnt hold true for some other parts of the world. thank you, you are quite right.

my point was that the general public and media routinely make mistakes when refering to ems personnel. i see in the article that it talks about different levels of training in different places, but it doesnt exactly nail down what people should call ems personnel. perhaps we could include a section dealing with the different titles around the world? i am not looking to define emt vs paramedic because i think that should be done in the respective articles, but i think we should mention something because it is a source of confusion amongst laypersons and a source of aggravation amongst ems people.

also, just because some places in the world still have ambulance drivers and separate medical people doesnt make it wrong to say that the medical people (elsewhere) dont want to be called drivers. i dont see where those two facts are mutually exclusive or where they really have anything to do with one another.

so what do you think, should we mention on the ems page what to call people in different places? or we could at least make more of a point that there is no official standard and mention some examples. Brendan19 (talk) 18:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite correct in that the actual terminology is 'Neutral' not 'No'. I suppose that I just got into the habit of calling it 'No' because in actual practice, that's what it means. You can't express a point of view one way or the other, without stepping off the fence. In your case, you only offered your opinion. If you had presented both sides of the argument, and 'studiously refrained from taking sides'...I might have questioned whether or not what was being expressed was actually relevant to the topic of the article, but you wouldn't have violated NPOV. You didn't do that. Adding the qualifier 'in the USA' won't help either, because you are still only presenting one point of view, and it isn't necessarily accurate. Believe it or not, there are still services in the U.S. that employ ambulance drivers (job title and responsibility, NOT qualification). It's not even that uncommon in some U.S. jurisdictions with volunteer ambulance services, where the service has willing volunteers who can't find the time to take EMT training and exams. In these cases, such members are ambulance 'drivers', and the service guarantees that the 'attendant' will be at least an EMT. Not ideal, and in many cases state regulations prohibit this, but the alternative in many cases would be for the State to fund a paid service, or for the community to do without. These arrangements aren't common, but they DO exist. In France, the driver of the ambulance is just that...a driver...period...all of the medical care is provided by physicians and nurses who go to every high priority emergency call. They have no idea what a paramedic or an emt even is...and they certainly don't recognize the concept legally. With respect to your concerns, we already have articles entitled Paramedic, Emergency medical technician, Emergency medical dispatcher, articles on EMS in different countries, articles on paramedics in different countries, and so on. This is a generic article about emergency medical service, NOT what EMTs and Paramedics like and don't like to be called. It deals with EMS as a concept and explores how it is provided in various settings, and in various countries, and some of those look nothing like what you are accustomed to. I've found it to be pretty common in here that some of us don't take the larger view...we assume that because we do things one way in our own jurisdictions, that this is a universal truth. That is rarely true. If this is a 'hot button' topic for you, perhaps you might consider creating your own article, dealing with public image and perception of those in EMS. Do a bit of research and include not only the U.S., but actually describe things around the world. It might prove interesting for you, and would provide the task force with a useful and important article. Give it some thought.Emrgmgmtca (talk) 11:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to elaborate a bit further, the terms 'Paramedic' and 'EMT' both meant roughly the same level of training, and competed for dominance. It was years before 'EMT-P' became an accepted compromise, while at the same time accepting that the term 'EMT' automatically inferred less training than a 'Paramedic'. That being said, the U.S. has not managed, after nearly forty years, to standardize its own position descriptions or certifications (you have EMTs, EMT-Bs, EMT-Is, EMT-Ps, along with a whole list of other numbers which follow these...none of which necessarily mean the same thing from one state to the next!). Then you have 'Wilderness' medics, 'Farm' medics, 'tactical' medics, 'critical care' medics, 'aviation' medics, and so on. Then you have firefighter/medics and police/medics (what do you call these?). And now, leaving the U.S., you go to Australia, where the term 'Paramedic' is unregulated and used by a lot of people who probably shouldn't. In some places in Canada, Hong Kong, Australia, and New Zealand, they may actually be called 'Ambulance Officers' as their official job title. Elsewhere in Canada, the term 'EMT' is never used, and is offensive to most, since their systems use Primary Care Paramedics, Advanced Care Paramedics, and Critical Care Paramedics, the least trained of which has 1,000 hours more training than an American EMT. In Britain, the terms in use are either 'Paramedic' or 'Ambulance Technician', although they, along with Australia and South Africa are developing Paramedics with a much higher level of training (Master's Degree) who are independent practitioners in their own right. In the German speaking world, the terms used are 'Rettungsassistent' and 'Rettungshelfer', meaning 'rescue assistant' and 'rescue helper' respectively. Even in those cases where the 'Rettungsassistent' is as highly trained as an American paramedic, except for immediately life threatening emergencies, they aren't allowed to even practice their ALS skills unless the physician who responds with them to almost every emergency call is physically present. Holland has ambulance drivers, paired with 'ambulance nurses' who perform all ALS skills independently. France sends physicians and some nurses to do ALS, but anyone else is a 'driver'. India uses 'drivers' as do most developing countries. Finally, my favorite, Italy, where the job title translates as 'the one who works the stretcher'! My point is this...after 40 years WE can't even decide who or what we are, much less agree on a standard set of terminology! The public has to be able to address us without either saying 'Hey, you!' or having to recite your entire resume. Without clear and unconflicting direction from us, the public tends to revert to the last thing that they saw you do, which was drive the ambulance! It really doesn't matter! Firefighters have argued for years that they shouldn't be called 'firemen' ('firemen are the guys who shovel coal in locomotives!') to no avail. The doctors who respond to ambulance calls in Europe are often called Emergency Physicians (in fact, there is no recognized medical specialty by that name in those countries...most are anesthetists!), and they survive the ordeal. You aren't going to be judged by the general public by the number of lights on the ambulance, the number of badges on your coveralls, or the number of letters after your name. In the end, you will be judged and either respected or found wanting, on the basis of your professionalism, skill, and degree of caring. The rest is, from the public's perspective...just gibberish. Food for thought.Emrgmgmtca (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

based on everything you just said (interesting contrasts by the way) shouldnt we mention stuff like that somewhere? maybe it is already out there, but i just thought we should try to educate people about the titles because it is so commonly confused. as for the letters after your name and badges and whatnot, i couldnt agree with you more. i am in med school now so the medic/emt/paramedic titles wont apply to me anymore anyway- i just know there could be more clarification. and youre right, the public really doesnt care that much- they just want competence (dont we all, ha ha). well, good luck editing and happy new year. see you next time when i am playing here instead of studying. Brendan19 (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try to figure out how to add Procedural sedation to the EM categorization.

By the way I do lots of EMS stuff aswell. Been working mostly on EM pages and some preventative health / psyc, but might do some EMS stuff. You are out of Ontario I see. Do much work with Ian Stiell?

Thanks --Doc James (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Can't say that I know Ian Stiell, other than by reputation, but I'm getting to the point where I'm pretty far removed from actual fieldwork. Worked under the Sunnybrook Base Hospital for years, and so, know Brian Schwartz and all of those folks, and of course some of the older emerg docs at the community hospitals. At the moment, I'm responsible for service-related planning (deployment modelling, the major incident plan, pandemic...that sort of thing), but I'm actually retiring from my EMS position after 35 years in mid January. Moving on to other things, and with a freshly minted PhD, I will be doing some teaching and research work related to disasters and their impacts on health care systems.

By the way, adding the tag that follows to the top of the discussion page for your article should achieve what you are looking for. If it doesn't work immediately, it will alert the 'bots and the gnomes, who will quietly take all of the additional required measures. It's kind of neat how the place functions in that regard.

{{WPMED|class=|importance=|emergency=|emergency-imp=}}

Emrgmgmtca (talk) 12:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And how does one fill in the last two = signs? --Doc James (talk) 03:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

emergency=yes. emergency-imp= uses the same codes as importance=. The first is importance to WP:MED overall, while the second is relative importance to this task force. Hope this helps!Emrgmgmtca (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Emrgmgmtca, I've now "fixed" your template three times so that it doesn't try to add your user page to the EMS article list and shows the entire code... I hope you aren't editing right now and thus being bothered with the repeated notes. This time I've finally got it right. (One of these days, they'll figure out how to do an automatic preview... I hope!) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm not really sure what is causing the problem. Do you have any idea?Emrgmgmtca (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating this article. If you could add some inline citations, the article could be put on T:TDYK and displayed on the main page. The content is all there, all that's missing are some inline cites. Thank you, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My own knowledge of this is poor; you may want to ask at WP:PWNB - hopefully an editor with a better background in medical field will reply.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank u for yours message. I working in polish EMS, so if u will be need more information can write to me. Grettings --Swd (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to a category for all medical toxicology / overdoses. Currently the series Toxicology and poison doesn't really touch on ASA overdoses, benzodiazepine overdoses, acetaminophen overdoses, etc. How would one go about doing this? I will come up with a list of substances probably based on goldfrank's. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it does link to overdose. And overdose has a partial list. Would like to make this into a category. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's philosophy is be bold! If you feel that the material would benefit from a category that doesn't currently exist, by all means create one. If you are unclear about how to do this I would refer you to our resident expert and WP:MED editor, WhatamIdoing. Cheers Emrgmgmtca (talk) 11:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you're still watching my talk, so I figured I'd copy this here:

Better late than never - I flaked out there for a few weeks, but I just finished up the copyedit of ABC (medicine). Give it a look :) keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 18:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Textbook are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 14:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome, although I'm not really that new here anymore. The point that you are making is interesting, and in some ways seems to underscore some of the confusion here. I realize that rules were made for a reason, although, quite frankly, I'm really not all that certain that the rule accomplishes what it apparently set out to do. The article in question, and the Talk page for the article, are almost purely POV, and in some cases written from apparent assumptions that I find both disrespectful and frankly, offensive. From where I am looking, a group of people who appear to have an 'axe to grind' with textbook publishers have turned the entire article and Talk page into their personal rant about textbook publishing. Clearly I am not the only one to see things this way, because the article has been both bannered and tagged by others. Not only is it POV, but there is absolutely nothing in the way of appropriate references or citations to support the positions being taken. Now, when you consider that one of those tags regarding the neutrality of the article has been there for 14 months, and the other for eight months, and still nothing has been done to correct the situation, yet I come in and present a different, more balanced, point of view, in an attempt to balance everything out somewhat, and within 2 hours I am being asked not to discuss the content of the article on the Talk page. If I wasn't assuming good intention, I would be a little suspicious as to exactly what was going on. It really doesn't speak much to credibility, does it?Emrgmgmtca (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the template warning. You basically seem to be arguing that since other people haven't behaved appropriately on the talk page, that you should be able to ignore the rules. What do you think that will accomplish? Help me with specific statements to improve the neutrality of the article, and don't feed the trolls on the talk page. Otherwise you're doing the same thing they are--arguing for your perspective and using the talk page as a soapbox rather than making productive changes. You've been here long enough to know how this works. Find the sources to back up your statements, and make the changes in the article to show a more balanced perspectives.WeisheitSuchen (talk) 16:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the welcome. :) Papercutbiology♫ (talk) 11:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cardiology task force is looking for editors to help build and maintain comprehensive, informative, balanced articles related to Cardiology on Wikipedia. Start by adding your name to the list of participants at Cardiology task force Participants. ECG Unit (Welcome!)

-- Addbot (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maen. K. A. (talk) 23:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

Papercutbiology♫ (talk) 23:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. DeLaughterDO (talk · contribs) has already been blocked and tagged as a sockpuppet. I'm not a checkuser, so can't find out the underlying IP address(es) from which the accounts are editing. If he's using dynamic IPs, then he'll be difficult to block at source - it'll just be a question of repeatedly blocking new socks and temporarily semi-protecting the pages under attack if it gets too bad. If there are any further problems, then you can file a report at WP:SPI or WP:RFPP. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 10:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I saw you created Emergency medical services in Italy. I am an italian EMT and I edited the article, but I am still a EN-3 user... Could you please check my edit? For any request, please contact me here. Thanks, --DoubleM 16:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome! I would be more than happy to check your edit. It's great to have input from other countries. You may also want to join the EMS and Emergency Medicine Task Force. You'd be most welcome. Also, if you wish to contribute in that way, you might wish to take the articles that we've written here and translate them for Wikipedia Italian, so that your colleagues who don't read English can also access the information. Similarly, if there are any relevant articles on Wikipedia Italian that you think we might be interested in, feel free to translate and post those here. Don't worry too much about the language, either...I'm pretty sure that your English is better than my Italian! One of us will always be happy to jump in and help with language! Once again welcome!!! I've posted the link to the task force below.Emrgmgmtca (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen your edits around Wikipedia and I feel like you would be a great addition to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Emergency medicine and EMS task force. We can always use more editors to help with improvement of EMS and emergency medicine related articles!

Hey, Emr, not sure if you're still around (heck, half the time I'm not sure if I'm still around), but I wanted to let you know that I finally got my act together and did the copyedit of Air ambulance you requested earlier this year. Hope, even this much later, it's still useful for a GA push... keɪɑtɪk flʌfi (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added new comment to Emergency management page. LittleBen (talk) 07:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, see Talk:Emergency_medical_services_in_Australia#user_draft. The draft has been abandoned. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 11:12, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Welly Unit.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 22:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit) Get free access to research! Research tools and services Resource Exchange Reference Desk Discover open access Free Resource Guides Book Sources Journal Sources Bibliographies Free newspaper sources Online archives Find Your Local Library tips Find Your Source tips How to find sources Citation tools guide Outreach The Wikipedia Library Bookshelf (meta) Universities and Libraries Archivists Publishers Wikipedia Loves Libraries Wikidata source metadata Get involved Get free access to sources Read the Books & Bytes newsletter Help disambiguate authors of scholarly papers Be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar Teach Library Interns Become a Coordinator Learn about TWL ...Support Open Access...

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

• Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
• Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
• If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.[reply]

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

The file File:BC Ambulance.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Klu-heli-2.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]