This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Search and rescue article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've deleted "Go away Burns!!!" from the "Search Phases" heading. It seems to have no relevance whatsoever.
Can we add a section about the Federal Aviation Regulation allowing private pilots to participate in SAR operations at the reimbursement of the government? Swatjester 23:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
It appears the intent is for "Wilderness search and rescue" in the introduction to link the the Subsection "Wilderness search and rescue" in the United States section. However, I couldn't figure out how to link to a sub section either. DriveBy27 02:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
The article is very US-centric. Editors from other countries, PLEASE step in! Una Smith 01:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the NTES (Northern Territory Emergency Services) operate in the NT, and not the AusSAR.
This article has countless links to helicopter yet none of them are clickable, whassup with that? TheBlazikenMaster 10:08, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
This article has many whole sections, particularly dealing with national SAR, that have no references at all. These have been paragraph tagged for some time, but few refs have been added as a result. I have managed to hunt down some refs for some sections, but most still are unreferenced. I have added section unref tags to show editors where refs are needed and also to alert readers that the sections are unreferenced and therefore totally unreliable. Editors should note that unreferenced information can be challenged and deleted at any time, so if you are adding text without refs it may be gone quickly. In short refs are required for all information in Wikipedia. - Ahunt ( talk) 13:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
There were severe errors in this section. The article supposes that the German Navy is also generally responsible for SAR services which is wrong. The Navy provides only air support and has an own section of Sea King helicopters for this purpose stationed in Kiel. And there is no such thing as an independent "German Coast Guard", it is simply a coordination center for a several independent civil services. 136.172.253.11 ( talk) 13:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
This article has to be improved as the official Norwegian SAR service is not described. The link below gives information about how the service is organized.
http://www.hovedredningssentralen.no/english/index.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.43.63.150 ( talk) 14:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
User:Gurroz just added a link to Superstition Search and Rescue to this article. This is a redlink, meaning that the article does not yet exist. If it were created what would this article be about? - Ahunt ( talk) 14:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Is this an appropriate inclusion within the broad definition of "Search and Rescue"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.96.254 ( talk) 04:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Some of the country sections (e.g. Canada and US) are rather large. Would anybody object to moving the details to new articles and replacing the sections by a few paragraphs (without the lists full of redlinks) ? DexDor ( talk) 18:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\barmy-technology\.com\b
on the local blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 9 external links on
Search and rescue. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:56, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Search and rescue. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Search and rescue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:22, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
I would like to see about adding our S.W.A.R.M. Drone SAR unit to this Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dronerangerpro ( talk • contribs) 16:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
I propose that content on rescue at sea should be split into a separate page called either sea rescue or maritime search and rescue, drawing from other pages. Although the summary on this page would be unchanged, a lot of content in the rest of the article would move over. The reason is that sea rescue is a broad topic that deserves an article on its own, just like cave rescue and mountain rescue. Existing articles on lifeboat (rescue), air-sea rescue and coastguard are too specific to provide an international overview on the subject.
This is an odd situation for a number of reasons. I created a separate article on maritime search and rescue last October. Another user immediately proposed merging it with air-sea rescue. There was a 2-1 majority in favour of a merge and the discussion stalled. Later that month, I expanded the article and added a significant amount of referenced content. The article was quiet for a while until last month, when another user called consensus and replaced the article with a redirect. There was some content on that article that has been lost in the process, including an overview history of sea rescue and a section on international responsibility. I will probably move it to this article if an article on sea rescue is not reinstated.
I realise that this proposal could be seen as overturning a consensus and that this should never be taken lightly. But it was only a 2-1 majority, and the original complaints about the article (mainly that the article lacked sources) had been answered by the time the article was removed. Anywikiuser ( talk) 14:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
The more I look at it, the more haphazard the way rescue topics seem to be. Is it time to merge rescue with search and rescue, even? Although if we did, it would be necessary to keep the page for disambiguation and perhaps to cover topics such as military SAR units. This is how I see the topic being best organised:
Anywikiuser ( talk) 15:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
I had added Category:Low flying, but someone reverted me. My thinking was that search and rescue is an application that involves planes or helicopters flying at lower than normal heights. Is there a more specific article on aerial search and rescue that could be included in that category instead?-- Srleffler ( talk) 21:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I can see in the english version of Wikipedia, that the Search And Rescue article ignores the main component of SAR in France (marine SAR), that is the CROSS organisation (Centres régionaux opérationnels de surveillance et de sauvetage ). This article refers only to the SNSM, a non-profit organisation specialised on the rescue operations by life-boats. So I propose : To create by traduction from french version an article on the CROSS system, referring to the french version. To update the links in this article to english sources each time it is possible. To use french links otherwise if the quality of the article requires to. To insert in the Search and Rescue article un abstract on the Cross system of about 12 lines and link it to the new article. To insert a link in the Rescue Coordination Centre article to the new article as well. Well that's all, fellows. Your advice is needed. Best regards. PS. English is NOT my mother tongue, so please I apologise for errors and possible misunderstanding. -- Moinolitto ( talk) 08:09, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Significant cited content should not be cut without establishing a consensus to do so. Editors who wish to may discuss their proposals here and seek that consensus. Decisions should be made on the reliability of the cited sources, per WP:RS, and not on personal political opinion, per WP:NPOV. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 05:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
References
"...in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public". By all means add material about the international law bit, but don't cut valid content just because you don't like it. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 09:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I have restored a couple of recently-cut citation tags and expanded them to explain why; terms such "most" and "often" are value judgements and we do not normally allow our editors to make such calls. While they appear to be correct, they are not necessarily so to the reader new to the subject. I think it would be better to either find suitable sources or to rephrase the content using more neutral words such as "may" or "can". — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 11:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
This article principally comprises lists of SAR organisations by country. Per WP:NOTADIRECTORY, does all this detail really belong here? Would it be better to summarise the main aspects of the activity and leave national details for national articles - either standalone articles such as Canada's or short sections in more general aviation articles for the smaller countries? A navbox could be templated for the terminally list-addicted. — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 11:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)