![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Rampton Secure Hospital received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Do we need to name individual patients? GraemeE17 20:51, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure how many musical references to Rampton there are, but the Anti Nowhere League just released a story concept album called 'The Road To Rampton' concerning the life of the main character who by the end of the album ends up being arrested and placed in the hospital in a song called 'Rampton'. Maybe someone wants to add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.15.125 ( talk) 20:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I've re-written much of the staff facility paragraphs in order to present a less personalised description and to tidy the style and tone. These still required citing for factual accuracy. Plutonium27 ( talk) 11:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Could anyone provide more information on the different wards and services available at Rampton for example the therapeutic villas, therapies etc etc it seems to me that this article only really focuses on the staff facilities or rather removal of and doesn't provide much information on the layout and facilities available to patients and also uses a lot of colloquial and subjective language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjudge123 ( talk • contribs) 19:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
In response to what is an extremely biased, badly structured and uninformative article - plus requests to add extra info (see above) - I tried to add context and history. Half way through doing this someone has deleted it all. Someone who regards eg the National Archive as not being sufficiently of merit to cite. Who didn't read the entire article and didn't give me or anyone else chance to add further references. The article remains uninformative, biased and wrong until it is improved. It seems that someone doesn't want it improved because rather than add references (which I was doing), they just deleted the additional content. This is very bad etiquette.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Rampton Secure Hospital received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
Do we need to name individual patients? GraemeE17 20:51, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure how many musical references to Rampton there are, but the Anti Nowhere League just released a story concept album called 'The Road To Rampton' concerning the life of the main character who by the end of the album ends up being arrested and placed in the hospital in a song called 'Rampton'. Maybe someone wants to add this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.15.125 ( talk) 20:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I've re-written much of the staff facility paragraphs in order to present a less personalised description and to tidy the style and tone. These still required citing for factual accuracy. Plutonium27 ( talk) 11:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Could anyone provide more information on the different wards and services available at Rampton for example the therapeutic villas, therapies etc etc it seems to me that this article only really focuses on the staff facilities or rather removal of and doesn't provide much information on the layout and facilities available to patients and also uses a lot of colloquial and subjective language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjudge123 ( talk • contribs) 19:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
In response to what is an extremely biased, badly structured and uninformative article - plus requests to add extra info (see above) - I tried to add context and history. Half way through doing this someone has deleted it all. Someone who regards eg the National Archive as not being sufficiently of merit to cite. Who didn't read the entire article and didn't give me or anyone else chance to add further references. The article remains uninformative, biased and wrong until it is improved. It seems that someone doesn't want it improved because rather than add references (which I was doing), they just deleted the additional content. This is very bad etiquette.