Talk:Street medic

Contraind?
I took out the statement that they don't use interventions with contraindications because that's patently false: CPR is contraindicated in a patient with a heartbeat, for example. I don't think my wording is too good either, however. Maybe someone oughtta write the Do no harm article or word it better. Also, the link to Bivens' article is broken. Delldot 04:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Major edit
This entry is in the middle of a big edit right now, and I don't know when it will be finished. Please help with dates, verification citations, and information, and remind me of any groups I have left out which should be included.

I reformatted the whole article, including a split of the original article into intro, what they do, and history sections.

I added pre-1999 history.

I am beginning a process of adding short sections on each group, including each group's lifespan and activity span, notable actions it participated in, and other things of note. All content must be verifiable. I am including names in the references section, but nowhere else in the article. This is to protect confidentiality. Feel free to remove your own name or ask me to remove your name if you don't want it in the article at all.

I fixed the broken link in the Bivens article, and added several new articles. I plan to remove the news artilces section as the artilces are incorporated into references.

Two questions:
 * Does Heartland Action Medical Resistance Rogues (HAMRR) of Bloomington, IL actually exist? I remember the one medic I knew who claimed membership talking about it a few years ago, but have never seen its name on anything but a 2003 training CSM / "HAMRR" / CAM training in Chicago. Or is it like my old group VAM!, who are all swell people, but only did really notable things with other groups (other than one OtG / MaydayDC / VAM! training in Hadley MA, 2002).
 * Can anybody get me information on the lifespan and activity span of Strassenmeditzin from good old Deutschland? They have so much stuff on their website, including a big first-aid manual, and a hint that they help train and equip groups throughout Germany, but the local groups link on their page is broken. Come on now, UK medics. I know y'all know them. Post, post!

I want to redirect searched for "Street medics, StreetMedic, StreetMedics, Action Medical, Action-medic, and so on to this page, but I don't know how.

Gobblehook 09:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC) formerly of HODOG/VAM! (2001-2003), CUM (2003), TRAM (2003-2005) currently CGHC (2005-)

No original research
I think I am violating the Verifiability policy by including the unpublished interviews as sources. However, I want this entry to be as complete as possible. I want medics, protesters, and others to actually use it. I also want to put up information on all the important groups since 1968 which are currently preserved only in medic oral history and by packrats like me.

So here's my idea about how to do it. I conduct a series of short, fact-finding interviews with key medics to fill in the missing historical details. I use these details plus a few anecdotes to write a short series on street medic history, that I get published at FreeVoices or Infoshop, or another easy publish.

Then I cite my own articles. It seems to me from reading the pillars and policies that this course of action would be appropriate as long as I adhere to a Neutral POV. Somebody check me on this? Thanks.

Gobblehook 10:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you then would introduce a conflict of interest, but if you can get them published in reliable sources (i.e., those with an established editorial process, vs. just you sticking them on a website somewhere) that can be overcome. Jclemens (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

AfD
This article alot of issues and highest among them is it violates wiki's WP:N and WP:V guild lines. Along with those problems it is has a very biased opinion and not holding to WP:NPOV Medicellis (talk) 14:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So, there are a couple of problems with this...
 * You used the WP:SPEEDY deletion process, instead of the WP:AfD process
 * In doing so, you failed to note the specific reason for the speedy. I think A7 is the closest proper criteria, but...
 * The article asserts its own notability, thus failing A7, and so it should not be speedily deleted.


 * Overall, I recommend that an admin decline speedy, and that you open an AfD for this. Having said that, if one is opened, I will vote to keep the article, based on the Boston Phoenix reference.  It needs work, the oral histories are not citable, and so forth, but it fundamentally appears to be a topic worthy of inclusion. Jclemens (talk) 18:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy declined, and I think it will survive without major issues if it goes to AFD. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed; it needs more referencing but such references do exist. delldot   talk  22:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Old further reading section to potentially be mined for sources
Here's the old "Further reading" section that was horribly bloated and preventing this article from getting the expansion it needs. Hopefully we can mine it for sources to use as in-text citations... SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

"And is now strictly only water"
I'm a street medic active in NW Oregon. Portland Action Medics still use LAW and street medic organizations in the PNW, such as Rosehip based in Portland, still use LAW. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C1:8700:1780:7D56:DC97:59B5:F84B (talk) 06:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)