Talk:Emergency Medical Services Alliance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Emergency medicine and EMS task force (assessed as Low-importance).

I have reported the IP address that has been vandalising this page. I am not sure what drives a person to do this, but it is childish and really has no purpose other than giving Wikipedia an unprofessional look. Firerescuelieut 17:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

==============================================================================

I undid a section that may have been construed as vandalism. While I personally agree with what was stated, the way it was stated does not follow the standards of Wikipedia and simply adds a personal opinion of the ongoings of the service, not facts. The opinions were stated in such a manner that it only provided one person's side of an argument relating to ongoing problems with the delivery of service. Also, some of the information provided by that author is not immediately verifiable.

Here is what was written: "EMSA Is in a state of Chaos, as the trucks that are on the street, do not have enough EMTS and Paramedics to properly mann a county of this size. These EMS services are expected to go to Marion County Fire Rescue which the Chief is ready to take it on."

... in the above segment, there are grammatical errors as well as unverifiable information. If some online articles documenting the shortage of EMS personnel with EMSA could be cited, a section detailing "Current Issues" with the cited information would be more appropriate.

"EMSA is an At-will employment agency that can fire you regardless of whether EMSA follow's proper procedures that we initiate. EMSA reserves the right to use several thousands of dollars to bully you. GOD is not there, but we at EMSA are..."

Again, if there are articles that can be cited to back up these claims, then they can be placed under the "Current Issues" section. BUT, it would need to be reworded so that it is stating facts.

A possible rewrite could be (adding the appropriate references where [cite] is shown):

"== Current Issues == EMSA has recently been in the public spotlight with some problems regarding the delivery of EMS services. Staffing shortages have been reported, resulting in a significant increase in response times, especially in the rural areas.[cite] In these areas, Marion County Fire Rescue has added transport-capable units to deal with this shortfall.[cite] Some discussion has taken place about Marion County Fire Rescue taking over all EMS services from EMSA in the future, but nothing has been formalized as of yet.[cite]"

As for the second paragraph, if there are documented events detailing these wrongdoings, then that part of the article may be rewritten such as: "In addition to the shortage of personnel, there have been accusations that EMSA has been acting unfair to their employees.[cite] According to [cite], employees have been reprimanded or fired even when following proper procedures. Some examples of this are ...."

All personal comments should be left out of the article.

If the author of that previous post reads this, and is willing to redo the section they added to state only verifiable facts (by verifiable I mean "in print" somewhere that can be accessed from the Internet) instead of personal opinion, I welcome them to add their information back into the article.

If that author would like some assistance, I welcome them to e-mail or contact me. Firerescuelieut 16:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]