User talk:Miguel Martinez Almoyna

Welcome

Hello, Miguel Martinez Almoyna, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Claritas § 08:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More About EMS English writen Articles Integrated Emergency Medical Services (IEMS) is also a derivated acronym of EMS Emergency Medical Service or System. EMS in English Speaking countries is a prehospital first aid service based either like in UK on an Public Health NHS Ambulance Service based on Ambulance professionals Emergency medical services in the United Kingdom, or on a non-integrated-with-public-Health-Service or in USA based on Rescue agencies (Fire Brigade or Police) Emergency Medical Technicians (EMT) called in many times "Paramedics" Emergency medical services in the United States. IEMS (SIUM in latin lenguages traduction) is an Public Health and Medical Emergency care agency and based in professional registered care givers (Physicina Nurse Ambulance Technicians and Medical Regulation Assistants) extended from prehospital Firs Aid to Intensive specilized Hospital care and including even a specific exclusive call center (Samu)SAMU.

Excuse me for my erors in English and in Wikipedian writing but it is difficult for me to intervene in four lenguages in four "different" wikepedias that are too frequently full of "errors" of traduction of English neologism terms and USA or UK exclusice concepts ! I ahave the same with the same subjects other Wikipedias French and Brazilians have the same biases of considering french is france and Portuguese is Brazil, Spagniards are less "colonialists" in my experience (Humour). I try in wikipedia to make traduisible Emergency Medecine terms. Thanks for your aidMiguel Martinez Almoyna (talk)

Dear friend

I like this friendly discussion because different point vues on EMS on Paramedic are important and must be understandable by wikipedia world lectors lectors.

First : about linguistic colonialism of France/French , and USA and UK/"Englishes". When I began to try to "write" in Wikipedia I first began to moderate France French writen texts about what "you" call EMS on what "they" call "Samu" and because many of the redactors know for long years that I apreciate but criticize their system aiding the other lenguages/countries to invent their propper systems first deffining anfd giving bilateral traduction habilities to both they react not agressively . ( For one of the obstacles is the word/concept Medical ans Paramedical that seems to be disambiguated in both also and even in Spanish or Portuguese! )

One of the conflits I try to overcome with wikipedian "redactors" or even "censors" is because the lector do not understand well on what and whose point of vue it the article been writen. EMS in france writen in English with a USA or UK (I dont know) writers has induced a total Rewriting by France French writers to day the two are biased and and must be . I had the Same problem when I try to write Samu in English ! I have to put big a foot on the title on what I mean with Regulation° Medical° etc . And I hope that a so usefull Wikipedain like you "corrige" (and not "delete") my poor english.

Second : about General wikipedian articles like "EMS" or "Samu" or "Paramedics" or even in those Country Specific Countries point of view I suggest that each lenguage/country has to be differencied because Bourbon writen by an US , English writer , Scotch by a Scottish and Samu by a French/Belgian. I do not kow how to overcome in Wikipedia these difficulties !

Third about Englih as an International Lenguage.

You say that English is a practical lenguage but only for English or US citizens? I think it has also to stay an International One , English neologisms are to be even in International disambiguated English to be deffined first in any disambiguation wikipedia extension. Could connect me with any Wikipedian working in this aim ?. Thanks for your aid and at your disposition in reverse.

I want to partipate to Wikipedia efforts in this area of Public Health and Emergency Medecine if it is its policy and in the lenguages y pretend writing.Miguel Martinez Almoyna (talk) 08:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Medico-Sanitary Regulation of Emergencies

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Medico-Sanitary Regulation of Emergencies. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - SAMU. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at SAMU - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Empty Buffer (talk) 09:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite apart from it being an unwanted fork of SAMU, it looked like a copyright violation. It was a long lump of text in an unencyclopedic style and with no attempt at wiki layout. It had been simply copy&pasted from somewhere else. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am discouraged by your deleting of "Medico Sanitary Regulation of Emergencies" because it is a new public Heath and medical process and Samu is an Agency or a Service called with a Englis Double Mening of Regulation.Samu is an international acronym that canot even be "traduced" by english EMS... the anglosaxon concept of EMS has no Medico Sanitary Regulation and is only a prehospital emergency care organisation! Sorry Because I think that Wikipedia is a good tool for international communication... II will continue my cooperation in Latin lengages Wikipedias because this cultural and linguistic obstacles and to intervene in English ones in my knowledge area. Friendly yours Miguel Martinez Almoyna (talk) 07:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency medical services

Hi there,

I'm afraid that i've had to revert your changes to the emergency medical services article, but should explain why i've done so.

The information you added was quite specific, and this particular article is designed to cover a wide range of possible EMS setups worldwide. In some cases, the information you added indicated that the physician led services were superior or more advanced than paramedic led services, and this is in violation of wikipedias policy of 'neutral point of view' (see WP:NPOV for more information)

Some of this information would be more relevant in country specific pages (Emergency medical services in France or similar, for instance).

Thanks for your contribution, and if you have any questions about this, please let me know.

Regards, OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 07:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend

Sorry , It is difficult accept for me that You have the power for reverting my adds to EMS article because <<In some cases, the information I added indicated that the physician led services were superior or more advanced than paramedic led services, and this is in violation of wikipedias policy of 'neutral point of view'>>. If you think the contrary you are doing the same !

My adds tried to improove this article writen in English but with a "an anglosaxon heavy cultural bias" . English lenguage can be the vehicle of other points of vue than USA or UK ideas on Medical Emergency Care organization. Even in English UK/USA 'EMS" and "Paramedic" terminology there is a big obstacle for communication with other Emergency Medical Care Systems that are much more integrated with Professional Medical Care Givers and Public Health.

Adds I proposed EMS made the article was near "acceptable" for other countries lectors that do not accept to import neither American Nor British EMS, more I think that it was a bridge between the two tendencies.

English Wikipedia has not to be only an American or UK Edition, other Wikipedias have not to be "traductions" of English ones. I will continue to contribute in this aim in French Spanish Portuguese Wikipedia editions on these subjects (that have not also to be France or Spain or Brazil autosatisfaction writings!!!).

Could yo be so kind to transmit this message to any "Wikipedia Redactor Board" if it exists ? Thanks for you comprehension and excuse me for may broken english~and for my poor Wikipedia procedures

Miguel Martinez Almoyna (talk) 12:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming back to me, and i'm more than happy to work with you to add new material which improves the encylopaedia, but it needs to be within the bounds of what is set out. If you read the emergency medcial services article, it very deliberately makes no judgement as to what system is best, and sets out levels of care from unqualified ambulance drivers to paramedics to physician led services, without comment on which is best. Your edits gave clearly inappropriate weight to one particular system and in fact at one point called it "more extensive and sophisticated" whereas I believe that the available clinical evidence in peer reviewed journals is that survival to discharge rates are higher in paramedic led systems. That in itself raises an interesting point, and I will try and add an evidence based section related to clinical outcome by structure.

I hope that makes sense. This is a wiki, and as such people have the right to make edits as they see fit, and that includes adding to, changing, rewriting or removing other peoples work as part of the ongoing editorial process, so i think a board might be a bit premature. In the first instance, i suggest that if you can point out areas on the article where you think there is a particular bias towards the EMT/Paramedic system, then please point it out and we can work to see if it can be improved.

Best regards, OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend

Ther is no evidence even in "peers reviewed journals" that "Physician care" is "better" and "lowers mortality" but saying that is more sophisticated tha a not medicalize one is an subjective current evidence for many. If you read other lenguages than english bibliography about their local "EMS" they are so biased than anglosaxon one and nobody in english countries read them ! There is a long imcomprehension between the two Medical Cultures more than misunderstanding is frequently bilateral despise in this theme. If yourself compare English EMS to USA EMS , I think like you I suppose that one is "better" than other... and Scottish is the more "advanced" of the three.

It is why I persist in my opposition in the redirection and merging of en.Wikipedia Samu article speaking of the Samu term logo and Acronym, Medical Regulating Centers called (Samu) article that are Services , And Medical Regulation that is a Public Health Emergency Care management process.

In a second instance only , I will point out areas on the article with you where I think there is a particular bias towards the Anglosaxon Cultural EMT/Paramedic system, to see if it can be improved. For me there is not a real "Paramedic System" neither in USA nor in England because ther are no consensual deffinition and impssibility of real traduction of this neologism in other lenguages. Even in English new improoved Regulations of NHS Ambulance System this new or future Care para-professional is not yet realy born.

I will try the same aims of my contribution to wikepedia in fr. pt. and sp.wikipedias and in hope these will induce "traduction" in En. wikipedia and becuase i think that wikpedia is an important tool in normalization of Emergency Medecine ...

Friendly yours

OK, I'm afraid i can't understand all of what you've written as English is clearly not a strong language for you, and you are using words out of context, like 'traduce', which is a very uncommon verb (i would suspect 99% of people wouldn't know its meaning - which is to ridicule or make fun of something). As for merging SAMU articles, that had nothing to do with me, so you'll excuse me if i don't comment on that.

In relation to your first sentence, Wikipedia rules are very clear in EVERY language, that subjective opinion is not permitted, only objective, fact based information from reputable third party source is allowed, regardless of truth. This information should also be cited in the text (see WP:V and WP:CITE for more information)

I would also disagree that the paramedic profession is not yet developed. Both in the US & UK the job is regulated quite strictly and has been for a number of years. The terms itself dates from the 60s, so i think can hardly now be termed a neologism. Just because an equivalent post does not exist in other countries doesn't necessarily mean it can't be explained, especially as i suspect that this is the largest system of pre-hospital care in the world, and in either case far more prevalent than physician led services.

For those reasons, I'm not that you've demonstrated any areas of bias towards EMT/Paramedic systems in the article, but i am willing to look at any you do find.

OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 14:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear friend I apologize for my broken english an wikipedian incompetence!

One "bias" is based in that a EMT "paramedic" is an ambiguous realy intraduisible term for many countries because even in new UK NHS regulations is and and and DOT US ones it is a conflictive term .

The big problem in teh future is to invent a the EMT versus Ambulance Technicians and Nurses , to merge "paramedic" with a registered Nurse that is a "Parmedical Personal" in many lenguages, and to precise what are their limits with the Physician monopol of practice. Nurse in english is also is a confusive term but not in Professional International point of vue. "Paramedical" "Paramedico/a", if accepted by English Lenguage Authorities, can be a easy solution that could be accepted identic in latin lenguages! I have studied this problem and the name of this new extrahospital care giver in many countries and I can aid you if you want to invent and integrate it with other care givers. Do UK NHS new regulations have been accepted by other professional associations? Friendly yours Miguel Martinez Almoyna (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that paramedic is used differently in different countries, this is not widely different to other professions, including doctors and nurses across the world - qualification and skill levels vary widely, and you cannot necessarily walk in to a physician post in one country if you are qualified in another - even more so for nurses. On the other hand, in most places, terms like Paramedic are tightly controlled, including the UK and South Africa, and training and skill levels are set, linked to a state registration. You cannot legally call yourself a paramedic if you aren't registered - the same system as is in place for other health care professionals. For this reason, the role is widely accepted, and in the UK, a paramedic is autonomous, and can give drugs and interventions without medical oversight.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggested for a naming convention, but it would seem that emergency medical technician is probably the best translation on these roles. English doesn't of course have language authorities such as in France, and acceptance is based on usage, and that is unlikely to become widespread. Not least of all because the regulation would almost certainly prohibit its use if it could be mistaken for 'paramedic', as protected title.

Hope that clears some things up. OwainDavies ^(about)_(talk) edited at 12:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:PARM.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:PARM.png

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 00:49, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:PARM.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PARM.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]