Re HCF's original research edit

 
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

Please help to improve this article and make it sound more neutral.

One thing I would like to clarify is my contribution to the article is not an original research.

I have obtained HCF's history information from a number of its annual reports, which are publications kept by state/national library. Main ones are 1982's (which reviews its past 50 years of history) and 2007's HCF magazine (which reviews its past 75 years of history). Such things are not my original research as I am not capable to do it. The information in its 1982 annual report did provide me clues to organise stories for HCF, which leads me to look at newspaper and resources stored at National Library of Australia and some other resources to prove those information is in fact correct. (i.e. a third reliable source has support/underpin such information)

The approach I have adapted is not different from what IBM’s profile has been made: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM In the IBM history section, people put one statement to tell its history (e.g. Starting in the 1880s, various technologies came into existence that would form part of IBM's predecessor company. Julius E. Pitrap patented the computing scale in 1885) then followed by a reference that contains old pictures in 1980s in some publications (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM#cite_note-8) to support such statement.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikikeanu (talkcontribs) 01:29, 4 April 2011 (UTC)Reply 
Your contribution should not be your original research. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research. I'll leave this request open for others to respond to your remaining points. kcylsnavS{screechharrass} 13:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your comments, I agree that there shouldn't be any original research. But I couldn't see which part of my contribution make people believe its original research? Could anyone provide more information? Much appreciated. Wikikeanu... 01:12, 10 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikikeanu (talkcontribs)

All dablink as at 05 April 2011 are fixed. edit

title removed from the article and thanks for pointing out.

Note: I removed the template so this talk page doesn't show up in Category:Pages with excessive dablinks. --JaGatalk 22:15, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HCF Health Insurance. 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:

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) 05:19, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply