Talk:Unexpected events
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
I am new to contributing to Wiki, and I hope I am doing the right things. I have noticed that somebody (who?) had tagged this page as containing problems of: essay-like, notability, original research. I am not sure whether and how I am allowed to remove these tags, so I was trying to improve, as follows:
- I have added references to convince that this term reflects a new trend in accident investigation, and that it is not just a personal reflection of essay.
- I have added some content, according to the "General notability guideline" in http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
- I hope that the added references may help realize that the content is not any original research.
{{delrev}}
I hope this resolves these issues, and that the page will not be subject to deletion any more.
Avi Harel (talk) 16:12, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I realize now that nobody pays any attention to my request to review the latest version. So I will try now to follow the recommendations in http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD. I will try to remove the Multiple Issue tag, and see what happens. Avi Harel (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
ticket # 2011112810015293
[edit] | The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://www.ashgate.com. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2011112810015293. Note: The ticket only applies to the following quotes given in the box below This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en  wikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission. |
quotes covered by ticket # 2011112810015293
|
|---|
didn't they watch out better? How could they not have noticed?'. You think you can solve your human error problem by telling people to be more careful, by reprimanding the miscreants, by issuing a new rule or procedure. These are all expressions of 'The Bad Apple Theory', where you believe your system is basically safe if it were not for those few unreliable people in it. This old view of human error is increasingly outdated and will lead you nowhere.*****
safety investigations, promote fear rather than mindfulness in people who do safety-critical work, make organizations more bureaucratic rather than more careful, and cultivate professional secrecy, evasion, and self-protection. A just culture is critical for the creation of a safety culture. Without reporting of failures and problems, without openness and information sharing, a safety culture cannot flourish.***** |