Talk:Bupa

Why no info on US operations?

At the very top you mentioned the countries they operate, one of them is the United States, but then in the whole article there's no mention of its operations over there but there's plenty about every other country you enumerated. Why? It feels as if that info was filled up by someone trying to sell the company to shareholders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0C:5A84:740F:2500:1999:F331:4314:6C54 (talk) 09:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

competitors

what other organisations are there other than bupa who conduct the same kind of business?

82.28.3.11Norwich Union (Aviva) is one, and AXA PPP is another... (Marco, 18/OCT/06)

NHS is the biggest competitor

Vanbreda International is the market leader on the IGO market. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.108.201.16 (talk) 07:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like an advertisement

"Bupa was formed as The British United Provident Association in 1947 to preserve freedom of choice in health care. It was believed that with the National Health Service being introduced a year later, there would still be a need for a complementary service enabling people from all walks of life to afford the benefits of choice in where, when and by whom they were treated."

All this talk of 'freedom of choice for people in all walks of life' basically just isn't true, any more than it is for any private health care provision. It sounds more like marketing material than actual 3rd party appraisal of the company's history. Nothing but glowing words are present throughout the article, despite stories like these: http://search.bbc.co.uk/search?go=homepage&scope=all&tab=all&q=Bupa&Search=Search

81.101.255.144 (talk) 13:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment from years ago and noticed the BBC link so I have added a few of those news reports (not by any means all) of them, plus some reports from Australia to give hopefully a more balanced account of this company. I decided to keep some stories which were already on the article as stand-alones rather than incorporate their citations into a long string of other refs, and re-ordered paragraphs in the Controversies section . I also made a few minor edits, and used bold for Bupa UK, Bupa in Australia and Bupa Global as this seemed better than making a new section for each. I tried to find some of the original UK Care Quality Commission inspection reports referenced only by date in a document by Compassion In Care which is a registered charity. I decided that this would be an acceptable source because its reports have been used frequently in print and broadcast media, and academic institutions and publications which are accepted by Wikipedia as reliable sources. I would have preferred to use the CQC inspection reports as the citations for some refs but earlier dated inspection reports seem to have been made unavailable online after the care homes had been registered under new names or new providers. I will see if I can access them some again when I have time. I tried to keep the balance by including a response from UK Bupa and a news item with a Bupa response to a specific negative news story, and taking care to insert alleged at relevant points. Faktoj gravas (talk) 11:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bupa. 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 {{dead link}} tag to https://www.bupa.co.uk/homehealthcare/showContent.do?method=viewDocumentContent&path=/apps/jboss/tmp/clinovia/group_wide/news/03_bupa%27s%20the%20new%20name%20in%20home%20healthcare.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100510133025/http://www.maxindia.com:80/newsjuly11.html to http://www.maxindia.com/newsjuly11.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:16, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bupa. 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/20101024215648/http://www.ftadviser.com/FinancialAdviser/Insurance/HealthcareAndProtection/News/article/20101021/fcd4bb60-d849-11df-a180-00144f2af8e8/Bupa-insurance-operation-snapped-up-by-Resolution.jsp to http://www.ftadviser.com/FinancialAdviser/Insurance/HealthcareAndProtection/News/article/20101021/fcd4bb60-d849-11df-a180-00144f2af8e8/Bupa-insurance-operation-snapped-up-by-Resolution.jsp

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 14:44, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Criticism and repeated references

The actual criticisms referenced are fair and accurate, but some of the articles referenced are repetitive. For example, the “Bupa Seven” case refers to issues dating back to 1999 and 5 articles have been added to this. I think 1 reference is fair, rather than 5. We should choose the proper reference with the complete information. Let´s see what is the best:

• 1 (note 85): what happened to the complainants, the process etc. after the complainants, short and incomplete news
• 2 (note 83): is a tribute to one of the victims without giving any information about what happened.
• 3 (note 86): is a book on the subject and does not allow verification.
• 4 (note 87): BBC report on the affair, with scant information
• 5 (note 88): “Compassion in care" full report in pdf format, the most complete information on everything that happened.

So I proceed to delete all but one note, the last, full report.
--Ursulabela (talk) 07:11, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Ucrania War and medical services

I am restoring the deleted paragraphs because it is about an emergency situation with changes in the Bupa medical system, and two specific countries facing the problem of war. This provides quick information to many people affected, so it should be in Wikipedia. --Miskito89 (talk) 09:27, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@Miskito89:: Nothing was deleted, it was moved to the body of the article instead of the lead where it's supposed to be. See WP:LEAD. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 09:59, 22 June 2022 (UTC)