Talk:Shasta Regional Medical Center

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

California Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Hospitals Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals 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.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Kgkeane519 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Prime Healthcare Services, owner of Shasta Regional Medical Center. Their editing has included contributions to this article. Declaration

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below]

I do work for multiple hospitals in California, largely on communications related issues. Full disclosure, Prime Healthcare, owner of Shasta, is one of my lesser clients but I am reimbursed for my time. My background, however, is in print journalism, and as a former journalist I'm struck by the lack of consistency and relevance of some of the items included in hospital postings. Yes, believe it or not reputation is important for hospitals, which work hard to position themselves as community activists. But when a common Google search results in a post that focuses on negative events that occurred some time ago, the reputation of the current hospital staff is damaged unfairly. Here, for example, the focus is on Shasta's former owners and whistleblower suits filed long before Prime took ownership. Ask yourself if this a fair accounting of the current operations. It isn't. As a paid consultant I don't have authority to change the page but I would hope that those who do understand the impact their work can have an institution's reputation. Here is a neutral way of approaching Shasta. I would be interested in hearing feedback: Opening Description

Shasta Regional Medical Center is one of two major hospitals that are located in Redding, California. It opened in 1945 and currently has 226 beds with an acute care facility and has become a regional medical center serving far Northern California.[1] It is also the first fully accredited chest pain center and has the first accredited nationally certified Stroke team in in northern California.

History

The hospital was the first in Redding California, opening its doors in 1945 as Memorial Hospital. It was purchased by Tenet Healthcare Corporation in 1976 and renamed Redding Medical Center. Tenet sold the hospital to Hospital Partners of America in 2004, and the hospital was purchased again in 2008 by Prime Healthcare Services. Shasta Regional Medical Center serves nine counties in Northern California.

Shasta Regional became certified as the first Chest Pain Center and became a Primary Stroke Center for the region in 2006.[citation needed] It was the first hospital in California and 11th in the nation to be certified as an Advanced Inpatient Diabetes Care hospital in 2010 by The Joint Commission.[citation needed]The hospital was named as a "Top Performer on Key Quality Measures" by The Joint Commission based on care and patient outcomes for Heart Attack, Heart Failure, Pneumonia and Surgical Care in 2010.[8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgkeane519 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC) Kgkeane519 (talk) 21:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)Kgkeane519 (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making an edit request and disclosing that you are being paid to edit. Would you please disclose your employer? (do you work for an agency, or are you freelancing)?

I have decllined your request, as you did not offer reliable sources supporting these changes.

The source should be independent of the hospital. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [See below]

As stated previously, I have received compensation from Prime Healthcare in the past for communications related materials. However, I write today strictly to set the record straight out of a sense of fairness for the current workers at Shasta. While I recognize that the history of Shasta Regional should include reference to the whistleblower suit filed against the previous owners, it is unfair to cite the suit in both the history and legal sections so prominently. In addition, the DOJ has settled the cited case against Prime without an admission of guilt: https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-prime-healthcare-alvarado-hospital-20180804-story.html

My suggested edits are below.

Thank you for your consideration Kgkeane519 (talk) 22:12, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Unable to review edit request  

1. Your proposal contains claims which are not covered by the LA Times reference you've provided. These claims require their appurtenant sources.
2. The claim statements linked to the single source you have provided do not contain ref tags.

• When proposing edit requests, it is important to highlight in the text — through the use of ref tags — which specific sources are doing the referencing for each claim. The point of these inline ref tags is to allow the reviewer and readers to check that the material is sourced; that point will be lost if the ref tags are not clearly placed. In the collapsed section below titled Request edit examples, I have illustrated two: The first shows how the edit request was submitted; the second shows how requests should be submitted in the future.

Kindly reformulate your edit request so that it aligns more with the second example above, and feel free to re-submit that edit request at your earliest convenience. Regards,  Spintendo  07:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is currently a mess. I have added the POV templates & made some major updates to the article in hopes of improving it. I've also added a few facility details & additional legal issues. I've deleted a lot of things that made it look like an advertisement (puffery & weasel words) & tried to rearrange the past legal issues so that it was more clear who was responsible and when the actions occurred.

I tried to use the articles in the trauma hospitals template as a reference point for formatting. However, because of notability issues & limited sources, I'm finding it difficult to find information to add to this article. In an attempt to make it more balanced & neutral, I've included a few minimally sourced neutral facts... I'd be much more comfortable if they were supported by better sources.

--Vandraedha (talk|contribs) 23:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]