User talk:Wrolf
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Call for help
Hello
I noticed you removed two elements from the Call for help article which are imho important:
- the fact that a protection should be performed first: of course this does not belong to the "call for help", but it belongs to the context and is not out of topic; the call for help is not an isolated act;
- the [[category:first aid]]: most first aid instructors agree that the call for help is maybe the only thign a people should remind from a first aid course, this is the reason why a classification under "first help" is important for me.
Additionally, I do not think that
- "The aim of a call for help is to get an advice (e.g. medical advice) or a rescue team in case of danger."
is a tautology:
- this gives an aim to reach; beeing in the wilderness and shouting "help!" is "calling for help", but it does not allow to reach the aim;
- it is important imho to know that a phone call will not always be followed by sending an ambulance (contrarilly to what everybody sees in, movies);
- a suicide attempt is a "call for help", but it is not the topic of the article.
On which point don't you agree?
Cdang 12:34, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Call for help 2
Wow, that RFC was a long time ago. Well, I've put the article on my watchlist. Maurreen (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Requiring log-in for editing: a good idea
I've finally done something about the anonymous edit situation, rather than just bleating about it in my edit summaries! laying the case before the Village Pump (here). I encourage everyone to support the move on Village Pump; and in the edit summaries of your reverts to link there — although I've been completely unable to figure out how to do it. . . . Best, Bill 13:56, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Emergency action principles
I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Emergency action principles, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Emergency action principles. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Joe 07:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
