User talk:Escaper7

Hi there, I don't know whether you noticed or not but you and I have been made Deputy Chief of UK Operations on WikiProject Fire Service, me and Daysleeper47 have worked together to create some templates for deputies' userpages' saying that you are a deputy along with me. Here is the code:

{{FireServiceWikiProject-UKdeputy}}

Well have a good day and if you have any comments or questions please feel free to contact me, Daysleeper47 or ArmadilloFromHell. Tellyaddict 14:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Escaper7, thanks for the comments. My apologies for the title. The idea came from another member who asked my input. I was neutral on the topic, so I said it was fine. You were one of the greatest contributors to the fire service topics, so your name was mentioned as someone who could act as an authority for the Project. My apologies for not consulting you. If you have any other concerns, please let me know. Stay safe, Daysleeper47 18:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there!

There's a discussion going on about what to call the page about the Security Service/MI5, and I noticed that you'd edited the page in the past, and might be interested in joining in. Please feel free to voice your opinion on the talk page. ConDem^Talk 09:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there

You recently left me a message regarding my supposed incorrect usage iof fire safety legislation.

I can tell you that all fire safety inspections are undertaken using the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety)Order 2005 and not Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004

I happen to know this as I am a fire safety officer with a UK fire authorty!

Thanks

I have replied to your comments on the discussion page of this article

Got your note, no problem....I'll write something and put it up in my sandbox then we can discuss the direction to go in. FYI I was in the job for 30+ years and have just retired so finding time to get some stuff up on here

Geotek 12:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll post up the Historic Brigades when I've just tidied a couple of things I need to check - so probably later today. I've started a second sandbox with the legislation stuff, digging through my old FSC notes etc. I was in GMC, ended up as DO III in Fire Safety, actually did 'Fire Safety in Heritage Buildings' as my disseration for my Fire Engineering degree. Hope to get that FS article up and running in a few days, then let the hordes get to work on it puting in the bits I missed out.

Geotek 12:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you removed Aylmer Firebrace. He was chief of the LFB for three years (1938-1941), and when he took over it had already been the LFB for 34 years (and this article should probably cover its predecessors too, since they only involved name changes, not amalgamation)! If you mean it was the NFS by then, the NFS did not come into existence until 1941, when Firebrace became its head. -- Necrothesp 22:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Ive added further comments to thie discussion page of that article in response to soem of your questions / concerns.

would also confirm i didn't intentionaly delete or block any of my previous comments - unfortunately my computer has a habit of highlighting whole paragraphs when i try to highlight words or sentences for alteration or deletion.

Infact ive had to write this twice because it keeps deleting!

The comment was supposed to mean that you talk to me on my personal discussion page first about any queries rather than the article 's discussion page!

Thanks for the comments, style - still something I am getting to grips with on here, the RR(FS)O - yeap aware of the SI rather than Act, that was done to bring it in faster due to various political reasons which don't need to be gone into here, the other parts of the UK - as I mention in the article there are differences, to be honest I am not sure how they fit together with other legislation in Scotland or NI so better to let someone who knows attend to that point. The link to the Wiki legislation sections - will try to get round to doing them as time permits.

As to the RR(FS)O and a separate article, I have somewhere a full list of all the Acts/orders/regulations that contained fire safety references - things like the Dog Breeding Act and the Zoo Act, if I remember correctly there were 86 references which of course are in the repeals section of the Order but some were cross referenced so the repeal of one part of an Act etc automatically repealed the section of another act or order etc.........gets complicated. I will try and find my list and we can work on that one. I was also on the first tier working party for the 2005 Order at the ODPM from 2000 - working for my ACO who was the CFOA fire safety rep....... so can add some insider info if I can keep it neutral - eg the logic behind it, the commercial/industry response and the involvement of the HSE in turning round the prescriptive enforcement to the risk based assessment. If you haven't seen them, the guides are up on the web RR(FS)O Guides.

There is still some more to be added in the area of public entertainment but I am still sorting that out to make sure it's correct and referenced. Added the Categories 'Fire prevention' and 'English law' {will get used to convention of Caps one day instead of all the edits} maybe you can add some others that are relevant.

Have posted it up now as History of fire safety legislation in the United Kingdom - so feel free to hack away take care Geotek 13:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

As you will know, there are many Grade listed fire stations in the UK, (Manchester London Road, Birmingham Central, many in London, to name a few.) As part of an article I am writing on Manchester FB (upto 1974) I am also doing one on London Road fire station which is now empty but a Grade II listed. I thought that I when I finish them, I should put up 2 pages

• 'Historic fire stations in the United Kingdom' with some info about listing etc and them that can be used to jump to specific articles like London Road which would be under several categories of UK fire and historic buildings.
• 'Historic fire brigades in the UK.... some background info then again linking to the old brigades.

For info...I am also compiling my notes to write an article on the 'History of the UK fire service' but that will take some time. I am also following upon the IFE thing that you mentioned.

Your thoughts on that lot Geotek 13:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

...here. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 20:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've added {{firefighting-stub}} to that and I've changed the refs slightly so it sas Retrieved on April 6 2006 as other refs do (or similar to that). Anymway, despite the minor conflicts we have had in the past I stil lthought I should tell you, also I've nominated Tyne and WEar Fire and Rescue Service for GA status, it may get a pass as i often review articles for this and hopefully someone will let it pass. Have a great Easter or Passover! Tellyaddict 13:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Nice to see you wished me a happy easter too.Tellyaddict^Talk 12:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Also you do know dont you that when warning vandals as you did here you can transclude user warning templates.Tellyaddict^Talk 16:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, again thank you for wishing me happy easter. Tellyaddict^Talk 10:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

THank you for your comments but I see where you are coming from, but find the ton of the section is changed by the revisions. I think that more talks are needed on the section, to find the correct compromise. the magistrates name Is not in my opinion necessary and where he is being held should be on his own page not the current section. Also the final line sound highly speculative.--Lucy-marie 00:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted the date back to it's original setting. The date is correct and is readable, it is written in that format so that users can decide how the date appears to them. In your account setting you can select how Wikipedia displays dates on pages. Various countries write the date is various different ways, and people have their own preferences as to how they write dates. Having the date linked allows everyone to display in their chosen format. Unlinking and writing it how you did makes everyone view the date in that format. The full details are on the WP:DATE page. - X201 11:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

That just sounds like a whole bunch of hassle for most users, and isn't exactly that common in other wiki articles, especially where text runs on in a par, as opposed to a list or table. It's hardly a significant date in world history so not sure why we'd link to it anyway. Meantime, I'll have look at my own date settings. I think it's important that Wikipedia articles are created with other readers in mind, as opposed to other editors - I can't imagine the occasional Wikipedia reader would want to create an account or change settings.Escaper7 11:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I've just re-read WP:DATE and it seems we were both wrong. I shouldn't have written the date in ISO format because of the fact that new users and anon users haven't got date formats set, but it should be linked to allow the date settings of people who have expressed a preference to work. The date should have been coded [[December 25]] [[2007]] That way new users and anon users will see December 25 2007, I'll see 25 December 2007 and the Japanese will see 2007 December 25 - X201 12:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your contibutions to the retained fire service article. These have been noted and generally improve the article extensively. However please refer to the discussion page of this article for some comments relating to your changes.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by A Lewis (talk • contribs) 21:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Some glaring mistakes have been made with this article which could mislead members of the general public - i suggest you read the government guidance relating to the RRo at www.firesafetyguides.communities.gov.uk for further information and clarification - the article should be re written to state:-

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 is a statutory instrument which places the onus on "responsible persons" to make general provision for general fire precautions including the carrying out of a fire risk assessments to protect "relevant persons" in all premises other than single domestic dwellings and other very few noted exceptions such as mines, offshore installations and bore holes etc .

Its full title is: Statutory Instrument 2005 No. 1541 The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. It became law on 1 October 2006, and only applies to England and Wales.^[1]

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety)Order 2005 signals the biggest change in Fire Safety legilsation for well over 8 years and ring-fences the 114 pieces of UK fire safety legislation under one banner/ heading.

You have incorrectly stated in the past that Fire Safety Inspectors use the Fire and Rescue Services Act to enforce fire safety standards (YOu will recall there were previous messages / statement on this discussion page which you have removed) It is infact the RR(FS)o 2005 that is the primary and most functional and important piece of fire safety legislation in the UK presently.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order places far more on "respnsible persons" than just simply producing a fire a risk assessment!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by A Lewis (talk • contribs) 00:56, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Actually I haven't removed any of my comments, they have been archived in the same way as every other editor on Wikipedia, and can be found via the link above. Escaper2007 22:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The 47 Act was brought in after the war to disband the NFS and allow a return to local authority control. It was supplimented by the Fire Service (Pay & Pensions) and the Fire Service (Disclipline Regulations). These acts applied to the whole of the UK incl NI. It was later changed in NI but they kept the Pay & Pensions and Discipline Regs. When I was at the College back in the 70s, all the guys incl those from Scotland and NI attended the same lectures on these subjects, it was only in FS that the three were split up and given region specific lectures. It was the FSA that allowed the creation of brigades like Belfast.........but as with much UK legislation, when things changed, many did not keep an eye on NI as it did not affect the mainland. The lastest legislation of course removed all the links between them, except that the Pay & Pensions continues for all FFs who were in the pension scheme under the old act still get the benefits from it. Hope that helps Geotek 23:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey... I read your articles on the UK Fire Service and was wondering would you be interested in posting articles on the UK fire service on the site listed above. I utilized some of the content on the site, but feel you would do better justice to the subject. The site is the same as wikipedia or citizendium, just focused solely towards the fire service. I believe we would even be open to creating a section for the UK... much like we are now doing for the German and Italian fire services... if you think there would be interest. Let me know... --Mfinney 23:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Norman_jay_aug2006.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. Jordan 1972 (talk) 18:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Grime, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Grime and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Grime during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

The article Institution of Fire Engineers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources to show notability. Issues flagged by declined AfC submitter of similar.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. KylieTastic (talk) 20:42, 6 June 2021 (UTC)