Talk:Drowning

Swimming C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Emergency C‑class High‑importance

	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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Emergency medicine and EMS task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Death C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Underwater diving C‑class High‑importance

	Underwater diving portal This article is part of WikiProject Underwater diving, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Underwater diving-related articles to a feature-quality standard, and to comprehensively cover the topic with quality encyclopedic articles.Underwater divingWikipedia:WikiProject Underwater divingTemplate:WikiProject Underwater divingUnderwater diving articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Drowning.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 183 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mendesjh20.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On the grammar and style of the article: perhaps it's time for some radical change?

I'm going through and fixing more of the egregious grammatical errors I can find. As I read through the article I'm finding more and more that:

Topics and ideas are repeated unnecessarily.
The structure of many sentences is unnatural, when I read them out loud I find they are missing important pauses that make sentences more friendly.
It's incredibly dense. I've never thought about editing an article on a medical condition before, but are they usually this overwhelming?
so. many. bullet points.

in reading Wikipedia:Ce I notice that under the section on style it says:

"Avoid affected, pompous, or excessive language, e.g. "due to the fact that" for "because", "ascertain the location of" for "find", and (in almost all cases) "utilize" for "use".
Check articles for unnecessary words and redundant phrases. Vigorous, effective writing is clear and concise. See Plain English."

Surely this must apply to non-medical articles?

Anyway, I don't want to rewrite the entire article because I don't think it's my place to do so, especially as a relatively new editor. I'd like to hear other peoples thoughts on what I mentioned above so I can know if I'm jumping the gun. --Coyopelly (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, Coyopelly! Constructive, considered edits should generally be welcomed on Wikipedia. Definitely, grammatical and stylistic improvements like those you describe may properly be made by anyone competent in the language. Likewise, organizing existing content may be performed by anyone who is, well, organized, and who has presumably first reviewed the existing article for its overall structure and flow. I would advise that you make fewer changes per edit, so that it's easier for other editors to gauge what you've done. —RCraig09 (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More generally, you may want to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia principles by clicking "show" to the right of "show/hide Welcome templates" on my Talk page (click here) and don't be intimidated; it will become clear. —RCraig09 (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice, RCraig09 ! As I am in the middle of editing right now, may I ask generally what should be done in one edit? Should it be section by section, or grouping similar edits together? By that I mean making one edit handle spelling mistakes (perhaps only for a section or two?) and making a sentence rewrite a differant edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coyopelly (talk • contribs) 21:06, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Coyopelly: There's no hard and fast rule, as far as I know. Common sense judgment should rule. My perception is that, the closer something is to the substantive content of the article, the more narrowly focused an edit should be. Conversely, if it's just spelling or grammar, larger-scale edits, and shorter edit summaries, are not likely to cause issues. —RCraig09 (talk) 21:23, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely awkward to read. Ronan.Iroha (talk) 11:48, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article is still in poor shape, which is particularly bad for a level-5 vital Health article, classed as High Importance for emergency medicine.

Copyedit/cleanup templates were removed from this article in December 2020 under the concern (which I agreed with at the time) that "these templates are causing problems by attracting incompetent edits", most of which seemed to be non-fluent English speakers pasting the article into some kind of automated grammar checker, and accepting all suggestions. It was never entirely clear why this article in particular was attracting that level of engagement, it may have been a misguided educational drive asking students to fix up articles from some list or category in a way that implied automated, non-fluent corrections were helpful.

In the hope that whatever it was has now passed, and to acknowledge to the reader that what they're about to read has problems, I'll try re-adding those templates. --Lord Belbury (talk) 19:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 August 2022 and 20 September 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LozoRa, BagiengK (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by BagiengK (talk) 16:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion and rewrite?

Hello there, I propose a speedy deletion of this article, since rewriting it to fix all the errors would take a lot of time, but using speedy deletions means that this article can be started over again. The type of speedy deletion in particular is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Db-g1, tell me if you disagree with this, and I will respond as soon as possible.

Sincerely, 49.192.44.178 (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The g1 speedy deletion requirement is that the text be "patent nonsense, consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". This article is simply badly written in places, and has 19 years of history to it. It could not be deleted under db-g1. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added copy edit and citation notices to the article, and tried to remove all the lists and turn the text into prose, as @Coyopelly suggested, but unfortunately, some editors have reverted all my edits, saying that the issues have already been solved, even though there are still spelling and grammar errors in the article that need copy editing. Can anyone explain why those people have reverted my edits?

Sincerely, 49.192.44.178 (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]