Talk:Cave rescue

Untitled

While the information under Incident Management shows some of the functional positions, the presentation format does not really demonstrate the use of ICS.--Cheselton (talk) 04:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cave rescue. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060206222505/http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/ to http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060206222505/http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/ to http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060206222505/http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/ to http://www.caves.org/io/ncrc/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Misleading? Or not misleading but in need of some explanation?

This article currently gives the impression that

+ almost all cave rescue attempts are unsuccessful (very few of the examples involve rescuees surviving)
+ almost all cave rescue organisations and all training is based in the US.

I suspect this is misleading, but don't know enough about the topic. If it is accurate, is there any explanation for the geographical disparity? Are there any active attempts to try to improve outcomes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.88.245 (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

• You're right on both counts. As it happens, the vast majority of cave rescues are successful and there have been some notable ones, such as the one Stanton was involved with at Alpazat Cave in Mexico. The problem tends to be that lists like this are the subject of me-too additions, and very quickly become unwieldy. And yes, many articles are US-centric, including this one. The details about the US Incident Command System is unnecessary, US-oriented, and encourages the addition of a section for every country that has a cave rescue organisation. The article is in need of a re-write, but I have no intention of taking taking the initiative on account of the flack that will probably start flying. Langcliffe (talk) 07:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
• useful source for improvement of the above: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/world/asia/cave-rescues-history.html Whizz40 (talk) 18:31, 10 July 2018 (UTC)