Talk:Safety

	Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:WP1.0

Philosophy: Ethics Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

This

This page is classified as a disambig and a stub. Am I wrong in thinking that the disambig tag should override the "stub"? Joyous 16:17, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, so I was bold and removed the stub tag. Spalding 18:29, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion and Confusing tags

I don't see what purpose would be served by deleting this article. It can easily be expanded, and it has a set of relevant links in the meantime.

After reading the instructions on the tag, I decided to remove the tag for two reasons: The article is useful, and it has many, many links to it. Spalding 01:52, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

What is the reason for the Consfuing or Unclear tag? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Triskele_Jim (talk • contribs) 11:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. It was added with the comment "For improvement yet" back in April with no comments on the talk page to give a clue as to his confusion. I've removed it for now. Anyone feel free to re-add if there is something specific that can be done. Kuru ^talk 22:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Safety

Safety is the ability to enjoy life without fear of harm, danger, or threat. There is Prevention from Abnormality is called safty. oR Lack of near miss is called Safty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.35.82 (talk) 14:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YTMND

Props to whoever put in "If you push it to the limit, your safety is not guaranteed." Sure, it is part of an internet fad, but come on. It works. I put up a link to the YTMND that was made because it had that line on this entry. I'm not sure though if putting up the info about the line and its origin is significant to this entry because I feel someone may end up deleting it. But still, the line itself works. --MassProducedGod 22:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we could discuss it, so as not to get into a revert war, but i think the line is nonsense, it doesn't fit into the article Jesushaces 15:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Push it to the limit LJumbo Whales 09:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism by YTMND users

For more details on this topic, see Safety Not Guaranteed.

This page is repeatedly getting vandalized. I'm loving it!

The safety of this page is not guaranteed. You must bring your own edits. Push it to the limit!

(previous 2 entries unsigned by 24.188.65.76 and 216.165.23.140)

Please add any pertinent information on Safety to the article List of YTMND fads. Otherwise, the safety of this article is now guaranteed indefinitely. --Tokachu 18:18, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it's not guaranteed indefinitely since it's only temporary. MisterCheese 23:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sure hope this fad wears off fast. ~~It doesn't look like it's limited to YTMND though, probably viral marketing~~. Once this article gets off sprotect, I'm almost sure that someone else will write about pushing limits. FYI, the sprotect itself is now the subject of vandalism.ytmnd.com. Weird. --LBMixPro ^<Sp ^e ^ak|on|it!> 00:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit will not be guaranteed

Before a revert war starts on that I think that can stay in, it is not normally visible as it is in a comment. It is also quite correct and it will probably disuade the vandalism a little. Shogun 01:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think the main problem isn't that the words "Your edit will not be guaranteed" is considered vandalism or not, since it's not displayed on the article itself. I think the only reason why it's there is to make the warning less boring. It isn't trying to fully repeat the meme.

The reason http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Safety&diff=prev&oldid=38724816 I reverted Jolb was because he deleted the whole warning, which will be needed now and whenever this goes off protection. However, I found out about the Snape (x kills y) warning, found it more fit and decided to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Safety&diff=prev&oldid=38746086 use something like that instead. But if you feel it shouldn't be on it regarless, please explain it, since we have the 3RR and all. --LBMixPro ^<Sp ^e ^ak|on|it!> 08:21, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protected at present but I did clarify the warning very slightly. Still hidden, though. The joke has worn a bit thin after numerous reverts on numerous safety-related articles. Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C]

12:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as how my comment will ultimately end up on a vandalismtothelimit.ytmnd.com/ YTMND of its own, I will say this: if YTMND users push their vandalism to the limit, I will push my indefinite blocking option to the limit. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is guarenteed. — Deckill e r 22:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The vandalism to it seems to have died down, as do the other fads. But there's really no reason the vandalism should continue. Everybody knows the eventual consiquences. --LBMixPro ^<Sp ^e ^ak|on|it!> 23:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they're right.

Typically you don't want to push things to the limit. When you do, for things such as cars, computers (as in the CPU drive), and other medicine (as in an overdose), your safety cannot be guarenteed. It's true. However, I still think that since we now have a seperate article, we can keep it all in there.-Serapindal 3.13.06

-hmm...I am a ytmnd fan, but this vandalism isn't funny...however, you have a point, and I never thought of it that way.

Vandals have spelling trouble

I think this is funny (Vandals have spelling trouble). Anomo 01:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection

Let's face it, this page just needs to be protected. Its safety just can't be guaranteed. Keeping this page unprotected could be considered not unlike pushing it to the limit. In all seriousness, wikipedia doesn't exist for the sole purpose of being the internet vandals' bitch. I will pay you when we get back.129.11.81.217 20:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a link

I work for the America's Most Wanted Safety Center, a new department of America's Most Wanted getting away from the capturing of criminals, and branching out to all aspects of safety. I feel a link to our main page would be appropriate and mutually beneficial. The link is http://www.amw.com/safety/ please consider it. Jrosenfe 16:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

maria karla

una pequena nina de cabello oscuro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.54.54 (talk) 02:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

maria karla

una pequena nina de ojos negros y cabello oscuro y flaca —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.54.54 (talk) 02:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC) ±±±±±±±±±±±±[reply]

nnnj

fdthfhghfhfhg ---- dgfh[fhfdd[[Media:nhnjhj<math>fghdgs</math>]]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.18.91 (talk) 08:51, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Link to The Subject 'Process Safety' would be nice to have on the list after 'See Also' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkibotpi (talk • contribs) 17:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative Definition

The control of recognized hazards to achieve an acceptable level of risk... Chris Grieshaber —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.87.143.28 (talk) 03:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes

This article is one of a small number (about 100) selected for the first week of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles.
Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article.

However with only a few hours to go, comments have only been made on two of the pages.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

References - shortage of

This is quite an interesting and thorough article but it is bizarrely unreferenced, having as far as I can see only one inline link. Quite a few statements are rather essay like - it's important to understand, a common fallacy is, and so on - they feel like I am reading someone's personal view on the topic, not a well-referenced encyclopaedia article. I don't know much about this field but surely for those who do, might it not be easy in such a well-documented area to provide some references to support the material here? Thanks and best wishes. DBaK (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of the safest places on Earth/Near you

Isn't there some sort of listing? Going from the safest places like e.g. these shelters dug under and into mountains where also database data is stored, all the way to in public places like in metro-stations, under bridges and the ranking for private places the basement under the staircase in your own home is a good idea to hide under? Such a list? Thank you.--SvenAERTS (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Safety vs. security

I'm not sure I understand the recent addition regarding the differences between safety and security. I've always though of safety as freedom from inadvertent or accidental harm, and security is freedom from intentional harm from crime.--'Triskele Jim (talk) 16:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]