Submission declined on 14 June 2024 by
S0091 (
talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject
qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published,
reliable,
secondary sources that are
independent of the subject (see the
guidelines on the notability of events). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see
technical help and learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
| ![]() |
Submission declined on 21 February 2024 by
CoconutOctopus (
talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject
qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published,
reliable,
secondary sources that are
independent of the subject (see the
guidelines on the notability of events). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see
technical help and learn about
mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. This submission appears to be a news report of a single event and may not be notable enough for an article in Wikipedia. Please see
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#NEWS and
Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event for more information. Declined by
CoconutOctopus 3 months ago. | ![]() |
The controversy surrounding the proposed safe injection site in Richmond, BC, Canada, has garnered significant attention and generated heated debates within the community. A Richmond city council meeting discussing the potential establishment of a safe consumption site at the city's hospital witnessed vocal opposition from protesters both inside and outside city hall. Opponents of the initiative expressed their concerns through chants of "no drugs in Richmond," prompting Mayor Malcolm Brodie to call for order and emphasize the importance of respecting the council's decision-making process. The proposal aims to provide a safe space for substance use, offering connections to treatment or counselling services, and is seen as a step towards addressing the opioid crisis. However, it has faced pushback over public safety concerns, with more than 17,000 people signing a petition against its creation. The council's motion has asked staff to explore the benefits and challenges of implementing the site, which would be managed by Vancouver Coastal Health. Critics argue for alternative solutions, such as increased support services and recovery programs, suggesting that more consultation could be beneficial.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
Safe injection sites are facilities where individuals can use drugs under medical supervision, aimed at reducing drug-related harms such as overdose deaths and the spread of infectious diseases. The controversy in Richmond ignited following a proposal to open such a facility at the city's hospital. [6] [7] [8]
As of the latest updates, the Richmond city council has passed a motion to explore the benefits and challenges of implementing the safe consumption site, with Vancouver Coastal Health playing a pivotal role in the decision-making process. Vancouver Coastal Health issued a statement within 24 hours that based on usage data Richmond does not need a “stand-alone” Supervised Consumption Sites. The controversy continues to evoke strong opinions from various stakeholders, indicating the complexity of addressing the opioid crisis in community settings. [20] [19] [21] [22] [23] [24]
The debate over the safe injection site in Richmond, BC, underscores the challenges communities face in balancing public health initiatives with community values and safety concerns. The outcome of this controversy may set precedents for how similar proposals are approached in other jurisdictions facing the opioid crisis. [25]
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
link)