Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Mississauga house explosion on AfD

I have nominated an article within the scope of our project, Mississauga house explosion, to be deleted. Please join the discusion. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 18:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Disaster Mitigation and Risk Reduction and the term "Non-Structural"

Congrats on the work so far. And glad you are open to more inputs. Two general observations: "mitigation" is presently getting short shrift. In addition to "assessement" I think it should be expanded with "risk reduction measures" where the various types of risk reduction measures can be elaborated and links made to the other good material already available. Reading the archives we should try to keep this internationally relevant. N. American may provide examples, but good to keep them as such so that many other models can be offered side by side.

I'm distressed to see the huge categorization of "Structural" and "Non-Structural". This is using "structural" loosely to mean what engineers refer to as "load-bearing" which is an odd way to define the world of disaster risk reduction. The widespread use of the terms in this way does not qualify it as a NPOV. From a social scientist or community organizers pov it is just unhelpful.

In the area of physical risk reduction an important set of actions is known by the term "non-structural mitigation" and refers to fasten furnishings, building contents and non-structural building elements to reduce the impacts of falling, hitting, sliding and flying objects in earthquakes and windstorms. Is this "non-structural" really "structural" or is it a subset of the big non-structural? See, it gets confusing? Similarly is planting mangroves structural or non-structural?

Any objection to calling these categories: "physical risk reduction measures" and "social, political and educational risk reduction measures" instead and expanding the mitigation section to reveal this richness?

M Petal 17:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU!! I've been dinking with trying to wrestle Structural and Non-structural into separate corners. I would recommend using the word "mitigation" still as part of the label ("physical mitigation", etc) but I do like your suggestion of using non industrial terms. (And I fully support using "risk reduction" and similar wording throughout the narrative). --Parradoxx 00:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I am all for your suggestion MPetal. All we need is a reference using your suggestion as Original Research is not allowed on Wikipedia. Now we are using Alexander. Welcome to Wikipedia BTW! I suspect that we are colleagues IRL. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 13:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

2006 Milwaukee explosion

There is some discusion about renaming the above article on it's talk page. Although the new name goes against the naming convention, it is not without it's merrits, and should at least be considered. Please join the discusion. Thanks Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 19:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

2007 Iberian Peninsula earthquake

A newly created article. Please help update it. -- Szvest - ^{Wiki me up ®} 13:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/1991 Hamlet chicken processing plant fire/archive1

Comments at the above peer review from members of this project would be greatly apreciated, I am pushing for FA status on this article. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 19:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Pressed on to the next stage. Please now see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1991 Hamlet chicken processing plant fire Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 12:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

What is the point...

Just curious, what is the point in putting the Disaster management on a lot of tropical cyclone articles? The scope of the project is defined as any article relating to policies as well as implementations of disaster management. However, is there really a need to include it in every single landfalling tropical cyclone? The template was recently added to Tropical Depression One (1992), which has very little related to disaster management. I just wanted to get a word on this. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, historically the disasters articles form a nice subset. This WikiProject should theoretically cover both the management of disasters and the history of disasters, despite the name. I tried to generate interest in a historical subset, working group, separate group, what-have-you, but not really enough. FWIW, hurricanes and other weather events are well covered by the Tropical Cyclones and Meteorology WikiProjects. I suspect that the other large categories of non-weather disasters are also covered by things like the Aviation WikiProject (air crashes), though as far as I know there are no WikiProjects on Earthquakes. Military History WP covers wars and stuff. Industrial disasters would be a nice group of articles for some people to work on. What would you suggest is the best way to handle this? Carcharoth 17:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess I sort of see the point, though it seems like attempting to cover the history of disasters is making the project needlessly large. I would think the best way to handle it is including only those that did have significant problems or successes in the management of disasters. Some tropical cyclones would and should still be included, such as Katrina or Andrew, though I'm not sure where an appropriate cutoff would be. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you can integrate the templates? that's what we did over at WP:PLANTS with the carnivorous plants and Banksia projects.Circeus 21:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that could work. I'm really not sure, now. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I must say I like the idea of integrated templates. I feel kinda silly adding the tag when it's already covered by the Tropical Cyclones project. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 21:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

If it's not too much work, then I suppose it's a good idea. Hurricanehink (talk) 22:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest that the project is renamed to WP Disasters. "Disaster management" inherently less-clear - do the effects of a minor TD have anything to do with disaster management? Because of POV issues the scope of the project should exclude War, "Terrorism" and other conflicts of that nature; but include natural disasters and things like plane crashes. If this was done, then this project could act as a central clearing house for disaster-related projects: for instance "how should we best present monetary cost of disasters?" is relevant to all projects with disasters in their remit. As it is not entirely clear if ALL tropical cyclones would be within the scope of this project (could you really say Tropical Storm Lee (2005) is)? If the project members here want it, I will edit {{hurricane}} to do the following:

• Add an optional disaster parameter - if =yes then it is included in this projects scope.
• This will add it to the WP 1.0 categories for the project (which are not hard to establish, again if you want that say), in a similar manner to how the meteorology ratings are handled: automatically use the WPTC class but leave the importance blank for editors of this project to determine.

If we can get it established successfully for WPTC and its template; then we can make similar modifications to other templates that relate.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Renaming the project would be wrong. We could, however, create a subproject named Disasters. There are a lot of issues relating to Disaster/Emergency management that we have not yet covered. As for the scope of the disastrous events that we want to cover it should include human-induced, sociological and natural disasters. For my professional work, I use EM-DAT and GLIDE as references for what to define as a disaster. An integrated template for cyclones/hurricanes sounds like a great idea. It could also be useful to discuss whether we want include the GLIDE identifiers in the articles. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 10:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason I suggested that is when I see the tag on TC articles I get a bit confused; there is little info on disaster management in the typical article on a disaster. "Disaster management" is a clearly a subconcept of "disasters" themselves. The scope of this project would be unaffected it just clears the definitions up with this sort of thing.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should keep our existing structure - all disasters are included - but rename the project to 'WikiProject Disasters and disaster management', since both halfs of the equation - disasters and management - are likely to be of interest to exactly the same set of people, and might as well be treated together. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Someone be bold and do this, please, then we can get back to writing articles. We don't have one on Valparaiso earthquake for example - killed 20,000 people in Chile in 1906... Carcharoth 15:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll do it at some pint, but I'd need a list of everything that needs changed, since renaming an established project is a very major change and causes all sorts of things requiring rejigging (if you see what I mean). Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

An easy, naughty, way of doing it would be to create WP Disasters as a subproject and move all disasters there. Currently, that would leave WP:DM quite empty in terms of articles, but there are enough potential articles out there to justify the project. Just an idea. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 07:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know - moving the template on every disaster article already tagged would be a Hell of a lot of work. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 06:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I hate it when I come into a discussion late! What is the current status of this discussion/current action being taken? I think rxnd's idea - creating WP Disasters as a subproject - is the right way to go (seems more intuitive), even if its the most labor intensive. I also like Nilfanion's suggestion of adding a parameter. Both of these things are way into the mechanics of Wiki, which I'm sooo not into; but if someone shows me what must be done, I'll certainly donate keyboard time as I can. Parradoxx 04:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, not too late. Current situation is this has frustratingly fizzled out - so reviving the discusion is good. I guess if people have the time, then go for that aproach - but we need to know we have the people and the time before we commit ourselves - maybe something bot-assisted? Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 17:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

2007 French coach crash for deletion

Mention since it seems in the scope of this project: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2007 French coach crash.Circeus 21:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Project Award????

Are we gonna make a project award? Or are we gonna stay like this and I'll be template boy?--Pupster21 19:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

GA nominee: Civil engineering and infrastructure repair in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina

The article on Civil engineering and infrastructure repair in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina has been nominated for GA status. I think that it should be interesting for some of the participants in our project. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 18:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Major clean up of Disaster

FYI, I will try to clean up Disaster as per my descripton here. Comments and help will be appreciated. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 12:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

"Disaster management" of labor struggles?

I have created an inquiry about what (some of) you folks are doing, here:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Organized_Labour#.22Disaster_Management.22_of_labor_struggles.3F

best wishes, Richard Myers 22:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sup?

Hey guys, I decieded to join due to my large interest in disasters. I am currently helping in keeping the Virginia Tech massacre article updated, so I gotta run, I just thought I would pop in to say "hi". Karrmann 20:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the project, and nice work on the VA Tech tradgedy. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 21:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Columbine High School massacre

Input at the FAR above is appreciated. Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 21:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of victims of the Virginia Tech massacre

I felt that people might want to come and share their views at the above debate. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 12:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Tech Massascre

The motives section of the Virginia Tech Massacre was deleted probably because the article was too long. Stalking is a serious issue particularly on college campuses. The narrative in the section on Cho's motives alluded to his stalking female students and disturbing behavior in the classroom. The section was probably deleted to make the article shorter, but by making the article shorter it left out valuable information that may prevent further death. By minimizing the importance of stalking incidents, females do not report the incidents, do not go to court to get a protection order, no action is taken against the stalker (including serious psychiatric intervention) and sometimes this leads to deadly consequences. In fact, if only a single female were killed by a stalker or a domestic violence incident, there would not even be a reference in Wikipedia. In some jurisdictions, reports of stalking result in legal intervention and in others multiple reports accumulate and no action is taken. If more follow-up had been done in 2005 when the first complaints were made against Cho perhaps 33 more people would be alive today. Cherylyoung 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD that has overtones for the project

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brisbane Light Plane Crash is about a general aviation aircraft crash. We do not, at this point, have notability criteria that can be applied directly, but we probably should come up with something. I'd appreciate it if members would take a look, voice their opinion, and consider how this can lead us to better criteria. Thanks! Akradecki 02:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Columbine High School massacre FAR

Columbine High School massacre has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Airreg

Template:Airreg has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — --Aude (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

This template facilitates external links (often within body text in an article) for aircraft ID numbers. The vast majority of links are to a particular site that way over does the advertising, in relation to useful information given for aircraft ID numbers. --Aude (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Adam Air Flight 574/archive1

Please go to the above peer review and leave comments as I push this article towards featured status!

Bridge disasters categorisation

There is some discussion going on about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bridges#Bridge failures category. -- Paddu 04:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

One of the points raised in that discussion is whether all engineering failures are disasters. Specifically, it has been suggested that Millennium Bridge (London) was an engineering failure that wasn't a disaster. In the light of this, should we rethink about having Category:Engineering failures as a descendant of Category:Disasters? -- Paddu 20:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens FAR

1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. LuciferMorgan 13:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The Sustainable development Portal

I recently started The Sustainable development Portal and offered it up for portal peer review to help make it a feature portal down the road. Please feel free to to help improve the portal and/or offer your input at the portal peer review. Thanks. RichardF 17:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The Sustainable development Portal now is a Featured portal candidate. Please feel free to leave comments. RichardF 02:52, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

RMS Titanic FAR

RMS Titanic has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:Disaster‎ created

Hi, this is a heads-up to inform everyone that I have created Template:Disaster‎, a template for starting disaster-related articles similar to Template:Biography. Comments are welcome. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 20:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Emergency page

Hi there, I have been looking at trying to edit the page Emergency, which falls under the remit of the disaster management wikiproject. It is currently a mix between an article and disambiguation page. I suggest turning it in to an article, and moving the other content out to Emergency (disambiguation). This has been the subject of some debate and i have now created a sample article which can be found here (in my name space), and the debate as to whether this will be suitable is on the Talk:emergency page. I would appreciate the input of anyone in the project who has feelings either way as to whether this should be an article! Many thanks in advance Owain.davies 07:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

NGOs

I notice some articles mentoning the Red Cross, while there literally is an army of other non-governmental organizations, some of them national, some international. Below mention of the official department of governmental to manage disaster recovery, perhaps sub-section linking to organizations that are the equivalent of Salvation Army, other religious groups, and non-religious charities that get involved in disaster relief. User:AlMac|^(talk) 22:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Air accident task force

When the Aviation WikiProject was reconstituted a few months ago, provision was made for an "Air accident task force", but the task force was not formally established at that time. Since we seem to have a fairly dedicated group of editors who are spending time on this subject, and since there's been discussion of developing some notability and other guidelines, I thought it was time to start putting electrons on screen to establish the task force. Currently, I've started the group's page at one of my sandboxes, and I'd like to invite any and all interested folk to join in drafting the material. Since this task force stradles the line between this WikiProject and Aviation, I'm starting this out as a joint effort between the two Projects. Akradecki 16:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Accident/incident notabilility guidelines discussion

Given that there have been a number of AfD discussions relating the borderline notable aviation accidents and incidents (such as United Airlines Flight 897 and especially Brisbane Light Plane Crash), I've initiated a discussion of developing some project-based notability criteria over at the Aviation accident task force talk page. Though this is a task force project, because the issue is fairly significant, I am seeking input from the entire project. Thanks! AKRadecki^Speaketh 18:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

List of disasters

This page is way too long and should direct readers to other lists.

This is my plan, basically all the sections would link to somewhere else:

• Man-made disasters
  • Air disasters → List of notable accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft and List of notable incidents and accidents involving military aircraft
  • Rail disasters → List of pre-1950 rail accidents, List of 1950-1999 rail accidents and List of rail accidents
  • Ship and ferry disasters → List of shipwrecks (preferable renamed "List of notable maritime incidents and accidents" and organized by date)
  • Road disasters → List of road accidents
  • Nuclear disasters → List of civilian nuclear accidents, List of civilian radiation accidents and List of military nuclear accidents
  • War disasters → Omitted for lack of sources
  • Dam/dike/levee disasters → New page, maybe "List of floods"
  • Environmental disasters → List of environmental disasters
  • Mining disasters → New page, maybe "List of notable mining accidents"
  • Industrial disasters → Industrial disasters (preferable renamed "List of notable industrial accidnets")
  • Explosion disasters → New page, maybe "List of notable explosions and fires"
  • Fire disasters → List of historic fires (preferable renamed "List of notable explosions and fires")
  • Miscellaneous → Most can be moved into other lists; a page called "List of building collapses" should also be created

• Natural disasters (chronology replaced bu sections)
  • "List of volcano eruptions" page for notable volcano eruptions
  • "List of floods" for floods and tsunamis
  • List of earthquakes fot earthquakes
  • List of epidemics merged with List of historical plagues into "List of epidemics and plagues" for epidemics and plagues
  • List of avalanches, landslides and mudslides" for avalanches, landslides and mudslides
  • Refere to tropical cyclone seasons for typhoons, hurricanes, and cyclones
  • List of tornadoes and tornado outbreaks for tornados
  • Winter storms of 2006–07 for severe winter weather; more pages needed
  • and any other lists as needed

– Zntrip 23:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

My only suggestion, both working and doing research in this field, is that you might want to further subdivide Human-caused. Unfortunately, within recent years 'accidental' and 'deliberate' have become increasingly important distinctions. Emrgmgmtca (talk) 16:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Ckimpson

A new incarnation of user:Cgkimpson, who created tornado-related hoaxes. Please watchlist Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cgkimpson. Circeus 20:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

This user is again back to old tricks, please monitor edits. Evolauxia (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Zaca Fire

Now that the Zaca Fire has crossed the 150,000 acre mark, I decided it was high time to at least start a stub on it. Additions invited. AKRadecki^Speaketh 05:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Adam Air Flight 574

There is currently a large-scale collaboration effort underway to bring this article up to FA standard. Any help on this undertaking would be greatly apreciated. Also, Hamlet chicken processing plant fire has been requested to be Today's Featured Article in a few day's time, if it is accepted, people should be on hand ready to sort out any problems/questions the exposure causes. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 18:58, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

9-1-1 dispatch

The English Wikipedia has a fine article about the 9-1-1 emergency number, but I miss an article describing the functions it manages. Such article could describe how calls are received and how alarms are send out. I am currently working on a Danish article about this function and I try to include some international aspects. --|EPO| ^da: 18:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for article on the Hexayurt

An article on the Hexayurt would be very worthwhile, I believe. However as it's a colleague's project, it's better if someone else starts it. More info (including NY Times ref) at Talk:Emergency_management#Hexayurt. --Chriswaterguy talk 15:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

1755 Lisbon earthquake

1755 Lisbon earthquake has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--Donar Reiskoffer (talk) 07:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

UTC?

I noticed a lot of articles about earthquakes (although not all) seem to use UTC as the primary time not local time, even some featured articles 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. However this doesn't really seem to agree with WP:MOSNUM#Time zones. I appreciate that UTC is prefered in a scientific context and also given that earthquakes can affect places in multiple timezones it can get confusing but personally I still feel the WP:MOSNUM#Time zones recommendation is best and we should use local time of the epicentre. Comments? Nil Einne (talk) 10:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Earthquakes, I beleive (but I stand to be corrected on this) are extensively studied even in the context of individual cases by the scientific community. As a result, there will likely be an unwritten rule to use UTC, and I can sympathise with that. But at the same time, in the context of the history of an area, as you say, local time is better. I propose that we should state the local time, then add the equivilant UTC time in brackets. This also saves readers looking up different time zones, particularly in cross-zone events. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 12:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Using both times should be standard, as well as some description, eg. makng clear whether the local time is before or after local sunrise/sunset, and what the weather was like and the time of year. There is a difference between an earthquake striking in the middle of a freezing winter's night, and one that strikes at 4pm in the afternoon on a hot summer's day, or one that strikes at sunset during a heavy storm. Carcharoth (talk) 10:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Good points... In other words as in 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake it should be 07:58:53 local time (00:58:53 UTC) rather then what it is now. This isn't a big issue obviously but one I wanted to make when I noticed this. It perhaps matters most when it comes to events that have a large time difference from UTC and also when it means a different date in local time, e.g. 2006 Kamchatka earthquakes. Or using a made up example, if a major earthquake were to hit Wellington tomorrow at 12:30 in the afternoon, it would surely be remembered as the 15th December 2007 earthquake by most of us New Zealanders, not the 14th December one (what 14th December 2007 earthquake???) and for the average readers point of view, it's usually more meaningful to know it happened in the early afternoon of 15th December (a Saturday) in Wellington not on the 14th December just before midnight UTC (except when your trying to work out when it happened in your local time which is one of the reasons we should also obviously provide the time in UTC) Nil Einne (talk) 13:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Renaming 1703 Genroku earthquake?

Please note that this has been posted simultaneously at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan#Renaming 1703 Genroku earthquake?.‎ --Ooperhoofd (talk) 00:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I have take the liberty to move all current and past discussions on the naming convention to a new page here and the existing conventions here. The discussion can continue there in a more coordinated manner. My conclusion is that all discussion so far have pointed to the convention being a guideline to be followed when there is no existing name for the event. --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 09:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

First transport accident with Nitroglycerine

This event with Wells Fargo in San Francisco could warrant an article on its own. It is current only mentioned in passing in the Nitroglycerine article. Any takers? --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 13:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Adam Air Flight 574

The above article, which falls into the scope of this project, is up for WP:FA. Please leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adam Air Flight 574. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 23:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Natural disaster vs Natural hazard

Dear disaster managers, I come to you for guidance. I've come across Natural hazard while categorising things, reverted it to an earlier, seemingly forgotten version and cleaned up a bit. Then I came across natural disaster which seems to be if not a photocopy then something utterly similar. In light of all the hot talk around these two articles within the past few months (like this merge tag and this short discussion), I ask for your help on what to do. My proposal is to merge both articles into one, but which name would be more appropriate? Eager to read your input. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 16:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I have commented on this on the Natural disaster talkpage. Today I will go on and implement my suggested changes. Any comments from WP:DM members or others are welcome. --rxnd (talk) 07:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have now made the transition of material from natural disaster to natural hazard. Seeing that the Natural hazard article basically is the old natural disaster article, there was not much material left to put in the natural disaster article. I would hence appreciate any help to expand the natural disaster article. Please keep in mind that the disasters are past and current events and that hazards are the phenomena and threat. In the process on making the split, I discovered that there is a lot of work to do with the disaster-related lists, such as list of disasters. The natural disaster article is in essence a portal to the disaster lists, which list of disasters also is. This needs to be ironed out. --rxnd (talk) 13:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

These two concepts are distinct, a natural hazard is something that has the potential to cause a natural disaster. E.g., the hazard of severe weather causes the disaster of a flood. TimClicks (talk) 05:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with TimClicks. A Hazard is an unresolved issue or element of risk, with the potential to result in an adverse event of some sort. It has been identified, but hasn't happened yet. This is the definition that the concept of risk-based planning (as opposed to 'all-hazards'), and also the formal process of Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment used in Emergency Management, are based upon. A disaster is a hazard which has achieved its potential for occurrence, and has generated one more issue than the community has the resources to cope with. These are the definitions that I use, in any case. Hope this helps! Emrgmgmtca (talk) 16:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ckimpson

For those who remember this user, see this article. "Cameron Kimpson" is probably active around somewhere, so keep an eye out. Circeus (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Eddie Ho and Air France Flight 358

User:Eddiehosa removed a paragraph discussing Eddie Ho's photography of the AF358 evacuation and the controversy surrounding taking photographs during an evacuation. See: Talk:Air_France_Flight_358#Eddie_Ho_and_the_picture_taking_controversy WhisperToMe (talk) 01:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

North American ice storm of 1998 GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I have reviewed North American ice storm of 1998 and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have left this message at this WikiProject's talk page so that any interested members can assist in helping the article keep its GA status. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues concerning sourcing that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left messages on the talk pages of the main contributors of the article along with other WikiProjects. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix if multiple editors assist in the workload. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Article Assessment

We discussed the introduction of Article Assessment in the latter part of 2006 (see archive), but we did not get all the way to launch it. Could someone who is experienced with it have a look at our Assessment template (WP:DM#Assessments) and add scales for importance and quality. It would be nice to have something like that of Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment. --rxnd (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, I have augmented the template to include assessments for Class and Importance, and I have also created the consequent category hierarchy. __meco (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, your addition to the template is what triggered my post above. Good initiative from your side! To clarify my post, my intention is to develop Disaster management-specific scales for Importance and, if relevant, Quality. Our project encompasses two main concepts: (1) disaster events, and (2) emergency management-related tools, methods and concepts. For the importance we would hence have to develop duplicate recommendations, i.e. what is a disaster with high importance and what is a emergency management concept with high importance. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to liaise with our related projects/task forces, e.g. WP:AIRCRASH. Before that, we need to develop a draft similar to the Assessment guideline of the Medicine WikiProject above. --rxnd (talk) 06:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Infobox template for road accidents?

I've tentatively created a template, based on that for aircraft accidents, in my sandbox: here it is. I'd appreciate any comments on its worth - I'm afraid I'm not much of a coder, so I did what I could with what I had to hand. It fills a gap I think needs filling, as there hasn't yet been a good infobox for road accidents.

Speaking of which...might there be interest in a subproject dedicating to creating articles for infamous road accidents? I notice a distinct lack of coverage on those here. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 20:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1071 articles are assigned to this project, of which 307, or 28.7%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Focus of project seems too event focused

Hi there, while I've only been here a while I have noticed that this project seems to be very focused on events themselves and a lot less on the management of disasters. There are some other avenues we could pursue:

• Hazardscapes of particular countries and regions within large countries
• Evaluation of different building standards
• Notable public education campaigns
• Academic institutions specialising in disaster management
• Organiations involved in disaster management

--TimClicks (talk) 05:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Itek Air 737 crashes

From Reuters. Looks likely to have claimed over 100... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Disaster management

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Lists of victims

An anon editor has twice added a list of deceased victims to 2008 Chatsworth train collision, and I have removed it citing WP:NOT#Memorial. There is a link to the victims list in the external links, and generic descriptions of unusual circumstances like one victim who survived a previous fatal train crash. The only named victim is the engineer, who is at the center of the investigation, and even this is somewhat questionable, because of WP:BLP1E. The rest of the victims are apparently non-notable, and not named. I believe it is standard practice not to list all victims in disaster articles. Any thoughts on this? Dhaluza (talk) 11:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Agree - that lists of victims who are non-notable are inappropriate in such articles. AKRadecki^Speaketh 16:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
• Agree - inappropriate and possibly listcruft. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 19:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Would that mean the list of victims found in the Boys in Red Tragedy article is not needed? --Kuzwa (talk) 21:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review: Mounted search and rescue

Please peer review Mounted search and rescue and leave comments on Talk:Mounted search and rescue. I would appreciate other eyes looking at the article. Specifically, what information did you expect to find in it that is not there? Thanks! --Una Smith (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Primarily what I expected to see were non-trivial references, which establishes an article's notability. AKRadecki^Speaketh 22:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Would you put fact tags where you think citations are most needed? --Una Smith (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Great Fire of London

Great Fire of London has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Kuzwa (talk) 05:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

American Airlines Flight 587

There is a dispute at Talk:American_Airlines_Flight_587#Sources_for_Jdey_citation over whether a man saying that he shoe bombed the flight counts as "al-Qaeda did later claim responsibility" WhisperToMe (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571

Have any other disaster survivors resorted to cannabalism in recorded history? ~ R.T.G 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The Cospatrick, the Dalles des Morts incident may count as a 'disaster' in its loosest sense, the Essex and the Méduse. Note how good shipwrecks are for it; I expected more airliners and maybe some other transportation too. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 17:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Sandman. I overlooked this thread as I discussed elsewhere as well. I should bring to your attention on this project that Category:Incidents of cannibalism is largely overlooked in case some of you are writing in some related articles. ~ R.T.G 13:24, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Us airways plane crash

Us airways plane crash - I'm thinking of retargetting this to the crash section of the US Airways article, what do you think? Comment at talk:Us airways plane crash 76.66.198.171 (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Attributing and contextualizing minority 9/11 theories

Review of Talk:September_11_attacks#Conspiracy_theories would be appreciated. The debate here is not about whether the existence of non-mainstream "conspiracy" theories should be mentioned at all, but rather about whether they should be put in context. By "context," I mean the fact that "conspiracy" approaches have been both rejected and accepted by notable entities. In other words, I mean that which is being removed here and restored here. My position is that the National Institute of Standards and Technology and "the community of civil engineers" (both of which have opposed non-mainstream theories) and a third of the American public (which supports these theories), as reported by Time magazine (which even goes so far as to call them "mainstream," but not so far as to voice its own support of them) are all notable enough to mention. My position is that this balance is fully in accord with the spirit of WP:NPOV, and especially in accord with its WP:DUE section, which states that "If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents" and therefore, as far as I can tell, encourages the attribution of the minority perspective, regardless of how true or false that perspective may ultimately turn out to be. Indeed, in this debate I have cited WP:V, which states that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Those who oppose the contextualization of these theories have also pointed to WP:DUE, but in a way that I view to be mistaken--namely, by suggesting that reliable sources should back a theory, while WP:DUE emphasizes the extent to which theories are held, regardless of their veracity, rather than "backed" by any particular types of evidence. Thanks, Cosmic Latte (talk) 01:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Note: For those who do not share my position (although the spirit of it also applies to those who do), I've made what I feel to be a basic--yet an important--suggestion in this diff on the 9/11 talk page. Cosmic Latte (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Ten worst nuclear disasters

In March 2009, TIME magazine compiled details of the ten worst nuclear disasters: The Worst Nuclear Disasters. Thought it may be of interest to members of this wikiproject. Johnfos (talk) 04:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Swine Flu map NZ.PNG

File:Swine Flu map NZ.PNG has been nominated for speedy deletion. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Added article (United States) National Strategy for Homeland Security

National Strategy for Homeland Security is a stub which is related to Comprehensive Emergency Management and seems to belong to this project as part of the management of disasters/terrorism. I took a stab at it after seeing the red link on the National Response Framework article... Hotfeba (talk) 23:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Invitation from a related project

Please accept this invitation to join the Tropical cyclones WikiProject (WPTC), a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with tropical cyclones. WPTC hosts some of Wikipedia's highest-viewed articles, and needs your help for the upcoming hurricane season. Simply click here to accept!

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Name of project

I've been slowly working on emergency-related articles, as well as lurking around this project for a while, and I was wondering if it would be more accurate to rename this project "WikiProject Emergency management"? Disasters seem to only encompass large-scale occurrences, which would be a sub-set of all emergencies. Although individual disasters are more likely to be notable (and thus included in Wikipedia) than an average emergency, the topic of emergency management/preparedness is notable, and is already covered by this project. When this project was created in 2006, there was discussion regarding disaster management vs. emergency management for the article title in the main namespace (at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management/Structure#Disaster vs. Emergency). Ultimately, emergency management was decided on as a better name for the article. I'm not quite sure why this project's name wasn't changed concurrently. Additionally, the main category for all of this project's articles is Category:Emergency management. Therefore, I am proposing that this project be renamed to "WikiProject Emergency management", so that the project's scope is more clear in the title. It encompasses all emergency management, and not just that of disasters. --Scott Alter 23:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of LANSA Flight 502

I have done a GA Reassessment of LANSA Flight 502 as part of the GA Sweeps project. The article is very close to meeting all the GA Criteria. There is one unreferenced section and some formatting issues along with two dead links that need to be repaired. My review is here. I am notifying all interested projects of this review and that I have put the article on hold for one week. Please contact me on my talk page if you have any questions. H1nkles (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Naming conventions of air disasters

Hi, I was wondering about the convention of using Airline Name Flight XXX as a naming convention for disasters. It seems conceptually wrong, as that flight number is shared by all the scheduled instances of the flight. If Foo Airlines 123 is the number of the flight from Here to There at 12 noon every day, if an aircraft serving that route crashes, it seems just wrong that the WP article named "Foo Airlines Flight 123" is about the disaster. That article should state "this is (or was, if it was subsequently removed or renumbered) a scheduled flight from Here to There at 12 noon every day. On day X it happened that..." and there should be a link to the disaster.

Basically I'm confused by the fact that the flight number is used as an alias for the specific flight, which is not. --Raistlin (talk) 08:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

2006 Kolkata leather factory fire GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed 2006 Kolkata leather factory fire for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Turkish Airlines Flight 1476 GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Turkish Airlines Flight 1476 for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

International platitudes

It has became an unfortunate sort-of convention on Wikipedia to include lengthy lists of international platitudes expressing sympathy with victims and condemning the perpetrators. As an example, see this list for the Jakarta Marriott attacks, where we're informed that the Swedish government, France, the OIC, and Marriott itself all oppose suicide bombings. Duh? I would like to suggest that these be removed from articles, unless the opinions offered are meaningful and/or surprising in some way. Jpatokal (talk) 01:28, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a governmetn propoganda rag-tag outlet -- it doesnt work on "duh" logic. The point here is to be encyclopedic. According to webster (widely acclaimed dictionary source): "a work that contains information on all branches of knowledge or treats comprehensively a particular branch of knowledge usually in articles arranged alphabetically often by subject." Accordingly, such notes of who said what (which are not always similiar in the remotest) can be of interest to X and/or Y studying matters of say terrorim in the future and the politics of such countries and allies. Therefore, without such valid grounds beyond "duh" the validity IS vital to all the hordes of readers who are NOT contributors.

These list provide little of notable or encyclopedic value. unless the opinions themselves are notable (say the opinions themselves were commented on), then merely listing predictable and numerous opinions of world leaders is of little value. I fully support the removal of the list in the Jakarta Bombing page. Further, i oppose the use of "other stuff exists" and "if you change this you have to change it across wikipedia first" logic to justify editing. ie, where is WP:PRECEDENCE? --Merbabu (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Make a new article listing all those who have condemned the actions :) Or just write something like "the actions were condemned by numerous countries and organisations". --|EPO| ^da: 14:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

2009 flu pandemic in Hong Kong

I had began work on this article in my userpage subspace months ago, but then suddenly became very busy and stopped working on it. I've moved what I've already added to a main article space. There is really a wealth of information that can be found on the topic. There should be no difficulties finding sources. The Chinese version of the article (for those who can read Chinese) is a good guide for what to search for. The work here really is to collect, organise, and present the main relevant issues. The article might be of interest to those who are interested in the swine flu outbreak because Hong Kong was the first reported case in Asia, and also because much of Hong Kong government's response to the outbreak came from strategies that were planned after assessing what happened during the SARS outbreak in 2003. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

disastermanagement

advice a model for school project in Disaster Management topic

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.184.197.246 (talk) 14:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Gravitational keyhole

While the gravitational keyhole article is about outer space, I think it is also relevant to this project. Please consider adding a project rating template. Thank you.—RJH (talk) 16:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:04, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Floods

Move? See Talk:November 2009 Great Britain and Ireland floods#Requested move. Simply south (talk) 18:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Disasters vulnerable to delisting as a Featured Portal

Just to warn you that Portal:Disasters hasn't been maintained in over a year, so would be vulnerable to delisting as a Featured Portal. I've left a message for User:Nishkid64 as the original nominator of the portal, but Nishkid may need a hand... Bencherlite^Talk 21:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Mohawk Airlines Flight 411

Mohawk Airlines Flight 411 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:22, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Featured Portal Review

Portal:Disasters has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Bencherlite^Talk 14:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion to format Haitian donation data as list that adds up totals

Not sure where best to request this, but I think it would be a greatly informative improvement if the articles about money raised for Haiti relief were formatted in tables that would automatically provide a grand total of the money as new entries and/or updates are added. Is there someone adept at formatting that can tackle that? There are individual articles listing such donations, including Humanitarian response by non-governmental organizations to the 2010 Haiti earthquake, Humanitarian response by national governments to the 2010 Haiti earthquake, Humanitarian responses by for-profit organizations to the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Thanks, Abrazame (talk) 04:57, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Category:People associated with the 2010 Haiti earthquake

Category:People associated with the 2010 Haiti earthquake has been nominated for renaming, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 January 24.

76.66.192.206 (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Unexplained moves

Recently, all articles regarding the 2009 flu pandemic by continent was moved by Immunize. I don't know if consensus needs it to be moved, but I reverted it before when TouLouse made the same thing. This day, Immunize moved all articles. A closing admin on 2009 flu pandemic in Europe's requested moved (moving back from 2009-2010 name to its 2009 original name) noted that the disease came up by 2009, so there is nothing worthy to call it "2009-2010". Any opinion? (Should somebody voted these to be back in their original names?) Thanks.--JL 09 ^_q?c 12:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Propsed guideline re the notability of railway accidents

Please see WP:RAILCRASH, where I've put together a proposed guideline re the notability of articles about railway accidents. Discussion at WT:RAILCRASH please. (sorry for late notification) Mjroots (talk) 07:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

List of missing topics

Can you have a look at this updated list of missing topics related to emergencies - Skysmith (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Article to be created

I tagged the section Roskilde Festival#2000 accident suggesting it be split into a separate article. Perhaps a job for someone here with a possibility for a DYK spot also? __meco (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Alrosa Mirny Air Enterprise Flight 514 Afd

The Alrosa Mirny Air Enterprise Flight 514 has been taken to AfD as a contested PROD. Mjroots (talk) 10:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on WP:AFD, WP:EVENT, and the notability of some aircrashes

Copied from WT:AV, originally posted there by MickMacNee (talk · contribs).
Does exactly what it says on the tin. See Wikipedia:Notability (fatal hull loss civil aviation accidents) for details.

Members of this WikiProject are welcome to comment. Mjroots (talk) 04:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Disaster management articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Disaster management articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:22, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

New stub template

Hi all -just a quick heads-up that there is a new stub template which is relevant to your project: {{flood-stub}}. This templatee can be used on any stubs relating to floods that would previously have got {{Disaster-stub}} and/or {{Weather-stub}}. At the moment the template is upmerged, in that it feeds into Category:Disaster stubs and Category:Weather event stubs, as there are still too few stubs for it to have its own dedicated category (it needs 60 for that). If it reaches 60, feel free to propose a separate stub category for it at WP:WSS/P (if it's that size it will almost certainly just be rubber-stamped, but WP:WSS would like to stay in the loop so that we know what's going on :) Hope the new template helps - if there are any problems with it, please let Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting know. Cheers, Grutness...wha? 08:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 Haitian cholera outbreak

A new article created, 2010 Haitian cholera outbreak. Feel free to contribute. Plenty of sources exists. --Kslotte (talk) 17:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Informal assessment and guidance for 2010 Copiapó mining accident?

I am one of the principal editors working on the 2010 Copiapó mining accident.

I would like to invite experienced project members to visit our article and offer their views on how were are doing for an "A" class Disaster Management article within the scope of this project before we request an actual assessment.

We also need an opinion on the article's importance rating within the scope of Disaster Management.

Thanks, Veriss (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Category hype in Transport distracts readers

Categories on transportation accidents are hyped up to "disasters" as you go up the line in categorization. This presents a problem to this Project because it lumps incidents and accidents into categories defined as "disasters". The reader/researcher is led astray into what s/he considers "trivia." To prevent categories from being "watered down" some categories need redefining and more precision.

I have recategorized CSX 8888 incident and Category:Maritime incidents so they roll up into categorized "incidents" all the way up the line. Before, it rolled up into "accident" categories, which, in turn, rolled up into "Disaster" categories! While I have changed it for these few incidents (for CSX for 2001 only, for example), many other categories need to be defined to replace ones that wrongly promote into worse-sounding categories.

Note that Aviation was particularly careful in defining its categories to "accidents and incidents" (see for example [1] Category:Aviation accidents and incidents but nonetheless, these too are rolled up into "disasters" further up the line.

In these two small areas, then, events that are irrelevant to "disaster" have been removed to leave room for what people are looking for in the "disaster" category. Needs more work to completely eliminate distractions. Student7 (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I've replied to this here, and it might be a good idea to keep this discussion in one place (instead of spread across several WikiProjects). Mlm42 (talk) 17:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

AfD Notice

FedEx Express Flight 647 has been nominated for deletion Mjroots (talk) 09:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Peer review for Air France Flight 447 crash

Hello everybody. I've just come by to let people know that there is an ongoing peer review for Air France Flight 447. In case anyone doesn't remember/isn't sure/has no idea, this was an Airbus A330 that mysteriously crashed in the Atlantic Ocean between South America and Africa on June 1, 2009 on its way to Paris from Brazil. If anyone is interested in participating, the peer review is hosted over at WP:AVIATION. Since this WikiProject's banner is on the article's talk page, I though I might drop you a line. Thanks, all. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 03:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Health/Medical disasters by Year

Surely Epidemics, Plagues, Food scares and outbreaks of Foot and Mouth disease are a form of disaster? But while most articles on epidemics/outbreaks in a particular year have a category such as 2012 in Fooland, most do not appear also as 2012 disasters. An exception is 1972 outbreak of smallpox in Yugoslavia. Hence I think there should be a category by year, eg: Category:2010 health disasters which would be a subcategory of Category:2010 disasters. There are two new categories Category:2000s medical outbreaks and Category:2010s medical outbreaks, but I think that “Health disasters” is a more inclusive title, to cover Food scares and Outbreaks of Foot and Mouth disease as well as Epidemics and Plagues. There is already a “by country” category: Category:Health disasters by country, but with only 4 countries in it. NB: added to this project page as it seems to include WP:Disasters. Hugo999 (talk) 03:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

Are there any infoboxes for fires? I wanted to add some to articles like Great Baltimore Fire and Great Fire of 1901 but I couldn't find any... Should there be one? Or at least a generic {{Infobox disaster}}? --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû _(blah?) 18:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

You can use this one to fit most any need in a pinch: Template:Infobox News event. There is already one for wildfires Template:Infobox wildfire. If you want a specific template for fire emergencies, perhaps someone will be more likely to create one if you list the elements of information you think it should have. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

OK thanks. I just found it strange that while there's a {{Infobox flood}} template there's none for fires even though they'd pretty much use the same parameters. (Eg. name, date(s), location, origin, damage, fatalities, areas affected.) I suppose {{Infobox News event}} will work in a pinch though. Best. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû _(blah?) 04:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I searched templates for fire info boxes, checked the various fire related wiki projects and even checked out some articles on major urban fires but came up empty as you did. I was probably as surprised as you were that the only fire-type infobox I could find was one for wildfires. Since major urban and industrial fires are such significant social and historical events, perhaps you can inquire about one on the two fire related wiki projects' talk pages. Other editors with professional experience in documenting major fires may be able to help you flesh out the basic information elements that would be useful.

Another option is to post flattering requests on the talk pages for the authors of similar infobox templates that already exist and perhaps they will make time to build a generic infobox specifically for non-wildfire fire events. Urban and industrial fire specific information elements that come to mind off the top of my head are; Number of Alarms, Number of Companies Responding, Number of Firefighters Involved/Injured, Lead Company/Jurisdiction/Captain-in-Charge, Classification of Fire, Fire Attack Strategy, Cost to Fight the Fire, Official Cause, fire related investigation, litigation, legal, insurance and other after-action information, etc. (I am not a fire fighter so I my suggested terms are probably technically incorrect and are just intended to get the mental juices flowing.)

If you succeed in finding a good template or in having one made, please be sure to link to it in this thread so it can be added to this project's template library. Veriss (talk) 06:59, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Citation templates now support more identifiers

Recent changes were made to citations templates (such as {{citation}}, {{cite journal}}, {{cite web}}...). In addition to what was previously supported (bibcode, doi, jstor, isbn, ...), templates now support arXiv, ASIN, JFM, LCCN, MR, OL, OSTI, RFC, SSRN and Zbl. Before, you needed to place |id={{arxiv|0123.4567}} (or worse |url=http://arxiv.org/abs/0123.4567), now you can simply use |arxiv=0123.4567, likewise for |id={{JSTOR|0123456789}} and |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/0123456789 → |jstor=0123456789.

The full list of supported identifiers is given here (with dummy values):

• {{cite journal |author=John Smith |year=2000 |title=How to Put Things into Other Things |journal=Journal of Foobar |volume=1 |issue=2 |pages=3–4 |arxiv=0123456789 |asin=0123456789 |bibcode=0123456789 |doi=0123456789 |jfm=0123456789 |jstor=0123456789 |lccn=0123456789 |isbn=0123456789 |issn=0123456789 |mr=0123456789 |oclc=0123456789 |ol=0123456789 |osti=0123456789 |rfc=0123456789 |pmc=0123456789 |pmid=0123456789 |ssrn=0123456789 |zbl=0123456789 |id={{para|id|____}} }}

Obviously not all citations needs all parameters, but this streamlines the most popular ones and gives both better metadata and better appearances when printed. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami

2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami has been requested to be renamed, see Talk:2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami . 184.144.160.156 (talk) 03:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Tobey regarding later detection of Fukushima radiation at US airports and disaster management

Please review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Tobey which concerns

Aaron Tobey Richmond Airport 4th Amendment Naked Protest

regarding later detection of Fukushima radiation at US airports, which is not yet mentioned, but is being discussed as a subtopic to be added in a more general potential article on US civilian aiport security regulation issues and public reactions, perspectives on and by foreign travelers, sociology, law, cultural phenomenology, international context articl Separately from the 'criiticms' subsection on the US Transportation Security Administration alone.

A potential general article not only on protest but on efficacy, social context, disaster management and events which are of national and international note in these regards would also include breaking 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami and Fukushima I nuclear accidents news such as Japan radiation sets off O'Hare airport alarms -- CBS News Chicago station reports trace amounts of radiation clinging to flights from country ravaged by earthquake, tsunami:

"Trace amounts of radiation from Japan have been detected in Chicago, CBS News station WBBM-TV reports.

Travelers coming in from Japan on Wednesday triggered radiation detectors at O'Hare International Airport as they passed through customs. Only very small amounts of radiation were detected.

...Feds move more radiation monitors to West Coast...

"We are aware of the radiation," said Chicago Aviation Department spokeswoman Karen Pride. "We are adding screenings and precautionary measures."

...Radiation was also found in luggage and on passengers on flights from Japan.

Mayor Richard M. Daley and other city officials wouldn't provide any additional details, saying federal authorities were handling the situation.

"Of course the protection of the person coming off the plane is important in regards to any radiation and especially within their families," Daley said at an unrelated event." [more at] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Tobey [and in the original CBS article March 17, 2011]. - Pandelver (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Wikinews links

user:Ohconfucius has been deleting Wikinews links from the various Great Tohoku Earthquake subarticles, are we good with that? I noticed that the Nuclear timeline article no longer linked to wikinews next to the date at which the wikinews article related to, then saw that several other articles now no longer have Wikinews. Ohconfucius's edit comments have no indication that any such edit is taking place, only that some fixing of date formats is occurring, which is quite misleading. 65.95.15.189 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC).

Spree killings

Are spree killings, mass murders and terrorist attacks within the scope of this project? Jim Michael (talk) 10:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review Hamlet chicken processing plant fire

I have nominated Hamlet chicken processing plant fire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 09:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Natural disasters

Portal:Natural disasters has been nominated for deletion. 184.144.163.181 (talk) 04:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

New article - 1944 Ilford rail crash

Hi there, 1944 Ilford rail crash is a new article. if anybody wishes to help out, please do. thanks! Totnesmartin (talk) 15:31, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Volcano infobox?

I'm looking for a good infobox to use for volcanic eruptions. The closest one I could find here is "News event", which is pretty generic. I also checked with WP:Volcanoes, but they didn't have anything intended for ongoing eruptions. Suggestions? Johnson487682 (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The guys over at WP:Volcanoes decided eruptions are more of a geological event than a disaster, so they created Template:Infobox eruption. Feel free to cross-reference it from disaster-related categories. Johnson487682 (talk) 17:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Space Shuttle Challenger disaster FAR

I have nominated Space Shuttle Challenger disaster for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Parrot of Doom 16:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Health disasters by year categories proposed

I propose to make categories for health disasters by year eg Category 2011 health disasters; an alternative would be Category:Health disasters in 2011. This is the only category of disaster which does not have a “by year” category. An alternative name could be “Health accidents and incidents” but “Health disasters” seems to be accepted as the overall category. To be subcategorised by century eg 21st-century health disasters. Initially to be for 2000 to 2012; there seem to be enough incidents or disasters to populate every year!

The category should include Epidemics, Pandemics, Flu outbreaks, Faulty or contaminated equipment, food or medicines etc. Also animal outbreaks like swine fly, foot and mouth outbreaks and pet food contamination. Also perhaps incidents of toxic metal/chemical poisoning and radiation poisoning. Possibly the categories Category:2000s medical outbreaks and Category:2010s medical outbreaks could be renamed to Category:2000s health disasters etc to be a subcategory by decade? PS: I will put this on several Wikiproject pages, so could you add comments to my talk page please. Hugo999 (talk) 01:24, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Disaster (Emergency) preparedness vs. Emergency (Disaster) management

I find it disappointing that "Disaster preparedness" redirects to "Emergency management"; surely these are distinct topics. I added the "Disaster preparedness" category tag to the bottom of the page, added a link to the "Disaster preparedness" *category* page from Preparedness in the "Emergency management" page, and also added a "Disaster/Emergency preparedness" Hatnote -- because otherwise there's surely no way that most people would find all the articles that are in the "Disaster preparedness" category -- but feel that this is a suboptimal solution. My idea of a better solution would be a disambiguation page (rather than a redirect) for "Disaster preparedness", which would allow you to select whether you want to look at the "Disaster preparedness" *category* page or the "Disaster Risk Reduction Page" or the "Emergency management" page etc. Likewise, "Accident prevention" is related to safety (education) -- but Accident prevention also redirects to Emergency management, which has no links to Safety. LittleBen (talk) 03:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Your edits appear to be reasonable solutions to the issues you raise. Veriss (talk) 03:45, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if there's any way to search for other cases where a whole category has been hidden by a redirect? (In this case, the "Disaster preparedness" *category* has effectively been hidden by redirecting from the term "Disaster preparedness" to "Emergency management". Or are category terms not included when one does a search for a term? This seems to suggest so. If so, surely that's a problem?) LittleBen (talk) 09:07, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I have added an RFC related to the Emergency management article here. Maybe the Emergency management article would be more useful as a hierarchical overview linked to articles on major subtopics. Then it would be possible to search for and jump directly to any specific subtopic of interest rather than being forced to try to find relevant stuff in a single humongous article. LittleBen (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Re Aviation accidents and incidents at sea

While Aviation accidents and incidents are classified by country, there is no category for those that happen over the ocean, in international waters. Hence I suggest that we have new categories:

• Category:Aviation accidents and incidents over the Atlantic Ocean,
• Category:Aviation accidents and incidents over the Pacific Ocean,
• Category:Aviation accidents and incidents over the Mediterranean Sea
• Category:Aviation accidents and incidents over the Tasman Sea etc.

These would be subcategories of Category:Aviation accidents and incidents and Category:Categories by body of water. Hugo999 (talk) 22:56, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Oil spill naming

Does WP:DM consider oil spills to be a disaster that falls under the purview of this WP? If so, would someone from the WP please offer a suggestion in this debate to rename an oil spill article? Also, you may wish to consider adding Template:infobox oil spill to your project page. Thank you. Johnson487682 (talk) 18:45, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Interesting page but as most of the examples listed are local, or continental the search term 'Global Catastrophe' should not redirect here. When i search for disasters, pandemics, or extinction level events I want to know about how the world survived, when i search for 'Global Catastrophes' it means just that: GLOBAL StringFellowHawke99 (talk) 20:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Sinking of the RMS Titanic

I've written a new version of Sinking of the RMS Titanic, which I'm intending to nominate for Featured Article status with the aim of getting it onto the Main Page in time for the anniversary of the sinking. If you have any comments on the new version, please leave feedback at Talk:Sinking of the RMS Titanic#New version posted - feedback requested. Prioryman (talk) 23:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Emergency Management Planning Collaborative Wikipedia Project (Under Wikipedia School and University Projects)

I am teaching an Emergency Management Planning course in Spring 2012 at East Carolina University, the course includes a Wikipedia Project. The class is a mix of advanced undergraduates and a few graduate students. Students will work collaboratively in groups of four to write on a topic of their choosing in the field of Emergency Management. I would like to co-ordinate this course assignment with the WikiProject Disaster Management. Is there any interest within the community to provide external review/feedback to the students' assignments (this would be sometime in late March or early April 2012). Please leave comments at User:Emplanning. Thank you. —Preceding undated comment added 02:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC).

Request assessment for Hotel Polen fire

The article Hotel Polen fire which I started up is currently a Good Article, I would like to know if it passes the A-class criteria of this project. S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 01:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

2012 Indian Ocean tsunami

There has been an 8.9 magnitude earthquake off Indonesia, with alerts and evacutions in all nearby countries. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:20, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Been downgraded to 8.7 but still very strong... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

A better article (2012 Aceh earthquake) was written an hour ago, but search didnt find it. Looks like WA isnt going to be affected, but lots of other places are ;-( John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Emergency Management - International Perspective

Hopefully I can give some constructive criticism.

While I am fully cognizant of the deserved status of the USA, especially among English speaking people and nations, I dont think the current article, notwithstanding the information gathered under the "National Organizations" has a fully international perspective, and has mostly, a US perspective. The subject at hand could be internationalised further, then specific reference to US organizational structures and legislation should be included. It is however better than nothing, US thinking on the subject is always useful, and it is always hard to seperate oneself from a national context when writing. I am loathe to make any radical changes as yet.

Further wouldn't "National Tribal Emergency Management Council" for Native Indigenous Americans, be a sub category of USA, since they are US citizens, and operate their organization within a US legislative/constitutional framework?

Always interested in reasonable thought and argument. 1 arm digger (talk) 01:06, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Algo Centre Mall collapse

Hello! Can anyone provide input on whether the collapse and rescue efforts should be noted in the Algo Centre Mall article first, or whether the existing structural issues should be first? The structural issues are chronologically first, but they only made headlines in the town, whereas the collapse is what the world knows the mall for, now, and clearly much more important. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

The structural issues should come first because they were covered even before the collapse. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Serial sockpuppeteer at work on disaster articles

Hi all, this is to inform members of this Project about a serial sockpuppeteer who has been active for a couple of years in air crash-related articles, and who has now switched his attention to articles involving disasters in other areas. User:Ryan kirkpatrick was first blocked 25 months ago and in February this year he was community banned. Despite this he has created sock after sock, now over 100 different named and IP accounts (see Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Ryan kirkpatrick). In recent months those of us working in Aviation have taken a hard line and his work on air crash articles has almost always been deleted under G5 of WP:CSD, regardless of the notability of the subject. He seems to have become sick of this so he has started creating articles where possibly he thinks he will escape notice. Three socks were discovered earlier this week, the most prolific of these three can be viewed here; the following articles were also G5ed and therefore do not appear in the list of contribs:

• St Alban's Head tragedy
• MV Patra fire
• Falmouth disaster
• Tramore disaster
• Glasgow tram collision
• 1908 Orléans factory explosion
• Grove Colliery mining accident
• 1980 London nightclub fires

Salient features of the socks are: a 'new' User, often with an alphanumeric name, knowing how to create an article 'straight out of the gate', usually with a very obscure disaster as subject (by which I mean its usually a little-known event, it's always an event involving loss-of-life); also creating categories to be populated by the articles he creates. All of this is done with very bad spelling and grammar, and he never leaves an edit summary. There are a number of Users who are familiar with his work, who can be seen in the SPI revision history. In the past he has basically stated: "as long as my work is kept, I will keep creating sockpuppets", which is one reason why I am posting this message. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 00:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Shuttle Challenger explosion

Several Challenger explosion images have been sent for deletion, see Category:All Wikipedia files with unknown source -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 03:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Levee

The naming of "levee" is up for discussion, see Talk:Levee -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Dasslogo.gif

File:Dasslogo.gif has been nominated for deletion as unsourced. This is about the US satellite system element for supporting the 406MHz distress beacon system. -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 04:58, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Please Verify The Duration of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake as Being 2 Days and 8 Hours

The edit here at 2008 Sichuan earthquake http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2008_Sichuan_earthquake&oldid=457076884 was done by a Wikipedian that only came here and made 1 edit and probably created a page on himself that was speedyed. I am wondering if someone can verify the duration of the earthquake lasting 2 Days and 8 Hours? I can't find anything on this right now as I thought it only lasted a few minutes. Please Help! Sawblade5 ^{(talk to me | my wiki life)} 19:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Operation Entebbe

Operation Entebbe, an article that your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 14:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill

There is a discussion if the Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill was split correctly from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and if it should be merged back there. Relevant sections for this discussion are this and this. Your comments are appreciated. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for John Allen Muhammad

An article that you have been involved in editing, John Allen Muhammad , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Fort Hood Shooting casualty figure RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Fort Hood shooting#Request for Comment. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Please help out on the article about the recent European snowstorms and their effects

I think this topic is notable enough and I'm puzzled why Wikipedia lacks articles about huge snowstorms. My article: March,_2013_European_snowstorms, thanks! -Rev L. Snowfox (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Doorwarning-seoulsubway.jpg

file:Doorwarning-seoulsubway.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Texas City 2005 refinery explosion

I have updated the content of the Texas City Refinery explosion, any additions, updates or corrections welcomed. There is a thread running on that discussion forum dating back a couple of years now about the naming convention used for this particular event. I agree that it should be changed to include the date, such as 'Texas City Explosion, 2005'. the refinery reference is somewhat redundant as its common knowledge what the event was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackrock36 (talk • contribs) 08:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Air France Flight 447 regarding the Summary in infobox

An RfC (Request for Comment) has been initiated at Talk:Air France Flight 447#RfC - What "Summary" should the Accident have? The RfC is about the Summary in the infobox of the article. There has been extensive discussion and edit-warring about the issue, so please participate in this RfC. HeyMid (contribs) 08:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Piccadilly Emergency Service.jpg

image:Piccadilly Emergency Service.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 07:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Grounded airplanes at Halifax International Airport on September 11, 2001.jpg

image:Grounded airplanes at Halifax International Airport on September 11, 2001.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 06:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

File:8-2earthquake-kanto.jpg

File:8-2earthquake-kanto.jpg has been nominated for deletion on Commons -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 07:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Multi-vehicle accient a type of disaster?

In Template:Disasters, would Multiple-vehicle_collision constitute a link in this catalog? Thank, Marasama (talk) 18:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Input requested at Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Hi. I have never posted on this page before so I'd like to first introduce myself. My name is Arturo and I am the company representative for BP on Wikipedia. I never edit articles directly, but instead participate in talk page discussion on topics related to BP.

I am here to ask for help with a discussion that has stalled on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill talk page. I saw that this WikiProject is listed on the article's talk page and thought that there might be a knowledgeable editor here who is able to join the discussion.

Recently there was some information added to this article about compensation procedures in the Gulf states that I would like editors to review. This information is largely based on an opinion piece from The New York Times which is not the best source to use in this situation. On the talk page I provided some alternate news sources that I think could be used to more fully explain the situation.

Is anyone here able to review this issue? Here are links to the current section in the article and the discussion on the talk page. Thanks. Arturo at BP (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Missing topics page

I have updated Missing topics about Emergencies - Skysmith (talk) 10:09, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

1948 Hatzic Pumphouse Breach.jpeg

File:1948 Hatzic Pumphouse Breach.jpeg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 07:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I've just launched a new article

Please take a look at the Disability and disasters article and help improve it. Roger (talk) 11:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Is anyone here interested in expanding this article? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Images of radioactive materials

file:Polonium.jpg and File:Radon.jpg are up for non-free content review. As this revolves around issues of radioactivity, this may impact on images used by this project. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

ACCC conductor in Moore Tornado.jpg

image:ACCC conductor in Moore Tornado.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 08:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Flagging tape.png

Triage tape image:Flagging tape.png has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 09:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Air France Flight 4590.jpg

image:Air France Flight 4590.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 03:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Burnintsunami.jpg

image:Burnintsunami.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.131.217 (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

1994 North American cold wave

There is a deletion discussion taking place about the 1994 North American cold wave at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1994 North American cold wave. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

TACA Flight 390 notability debate

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aviation#Fatal_commercial_jetliner_crash_article_tagged_for_notability_due_to_no_demonstration_of_.22lasting_effect.22 about TACA Flight 390 WhisperToMe (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

2014 UK Floods

The floods in the UK are making big headlines since it started in early 2014. There is no article about the floods and upcoming weather meaning the floods are likely to last long then before. It has also approached the wettest January since records began and it now nearing February and yet no article been created about the floods, are the floods not notable??? User:TCAA4 User talk:TCAA4 19:44 GMT —Preceding undated comment added 19:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

• • I too am surprised. The closest there seems to be is the Cyclone Dirk and Cyclone Anne (2014) articles, but to read them alone would give the impression that there was a short period of flooding in two separate incidents, rather than a sustained period of interlinked flooding, windstorms. As is, there's no mention of Muchelney (probably as it doesn't really fit in either page) and the whole of Cornwall is now cut off from the rest of the rail network by the collapse of the Dawlish Sea wall. While there might not be enough content for a page solely about the 2013-2014 UK Floods, I think there's certainly a case to be made for '2013-2014 UK Winter Storms' or '2013-2014 Western Europe Winter Storms' given the fact that the effects are certainly not localized solely to the UK based on the two articles I've mentioned. As for the period such an article would cover, Anne and Dirk are definitely key events, but in hindsight I think there's a decent case to be made for discussing the entire period since the St. Jude storm storm as a general period of sustained stormy weather considering that the storms we already have articles on (so not even counting intervening periods of bad weather) cover Oct 26th-31st, Dec 4th-10th, Dec 21st-27th, Jan 1st-6th and Jan 3rd-10th. Taking into account the North Sea flood of 2013 and we're clearly looking at, at the very least, two periods of linked storms separated by 10 days both giving rise to significant and at times sustained flooding across North West Europe.ImperatordeElysium 14:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImperatordeElysium (talk • contribs)

Categories for discussion

Please see my proposal to rename Category:Dam disasters and its sub cats here. Opinions and comments welcome.--NortyNort (Holla) 22:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Complementary Infobox help

Hi. I'd like to share with you an idea to add the infobox, which can complement the information about natural disasters or military conflicts. I propose it on behalf of the UN OCHA and humanitarian community. This infobox standardize information about population affected by the emergency. The general idea is to fill this infobox together with infoboxes related to different disasters. But I'm not sure how to link them. I don't have big experience in creating templates, so I would appreciate your help and advice. If anyone can review the template I've created, I will be very grateful. Thanks Daria (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Help needed in a content dispute

We need some additional eyes on the article May 2014 San Diego County wildfires and its talk page. This is a heavily-viewed article about a current wildfire situation, but there only appear to be two of us watching it. I particularly need help with a content dispute, discussed at the talk page. The other editor insists on adding "arson" to the "ignition sources" in the infobox, even though the article contains no mention of arson, and no reliable or official source has claimed that any of these dozen or so fires were started by arson. I think it's important that we get this right but I don't want to edit war. Someone knowledgeable please take a look, evaluate the evidence and arguments, and weigh in. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

That content dispute has been resolved, but I would still appreciate some additional pairs of eyes on that article. --MelanieN (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Disaster Management at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Request for independant assessment of an article: Trans-Canada Air Lines Flight 304

I am slowly working on improving this article, I've managed to locate an accident report and am slowly adding internal references based on the sources that I have direct access to. What I would like is an independant assessment of the article so that I know what needs to be done to further improve it. Graham1973 (talk) 08:40, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

2014 India – Pakistan floods

Please look into this article and rate it. Please also contribute towards the article. Naveed (talk) 19:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Felling mine disaster

The naming of the article "Felling mine disaster" is under discussion, see talk:Felling mine disaster -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 03:04, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Wind Jet Flight 243

The Wind Jet Flight 243 article is currently at AfD. Mjroots (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2010

Food security

Under the Food Security page, there is little coverage of emergency food distribution channels, actors, or methods. Would this be a useful addition to this page?

Expert attention

I have created Category:Disaster management articles needing expert attention, for making Category:Earthquakes articles needing expert attention a subcategory of it. Category:Disaster management articles needing expert attention might be populated in the future and might be of interest to your WikiProject. Iceblock (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article discussion

Please see Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/2013 Rosario gas explosion. — Cirt (talk) 01:08, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Disaster management for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (confess) @ 20:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

2015 Nepal earthquake listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2015 Nepal earthquake. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 00:55, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Article alerts

Have stubbed in Article alerts and New article alerts for this WP. If I've done it right, the next time the bots run these respective services, the stubs should be populated. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Boston Molasses Disaster listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Boston Molasses Disaster to be moved to Great Molasses Flood. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2006 Java earthquake listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for May 2006 Java earthquake to be moved to 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:45, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Boston Marathon bombings listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Boston Marathon bombings to be moved to Boston Marathon bombing. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

2014 East Harlem apartment buildings explosion listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for 2014 East Harlem apartment buildings explosion to be moved to 2014 East Harlem gas explosion. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Help with Operation Sahayogi Haat, Nepal Earthquake relief operation for a DYK?

Can't finish this worthy stub for a DYK as day job calls. Anyone available to make Operation Sahayogi Haat a DYK? --Djembayz (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Updating/Expanding Canecão Mineiro nightclub fire

I've started a small project to group all the Nightclub fires started by misuse of pyrotechnics under a single category and found this "stub" article which consists of a single line of text and a link to a Brazilian(?) news article. Any help in expanding or finding other sources for this article would be greatly appreciated. Graham1973 (talk) 15:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Motel 6 in Bremerton, Washington, Rocked by Gas Explosion; 2 Remain Missing

Is this covered somewhere: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/motel-6-bremerton-washington-rocked-gas-explosion-n412166 Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:06, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Deleting Disaster Risk Management in East Asia

I've nominated Disaster Risk Management in East Asia for deletion, and would like to open discuss here, or its talk page:

“ This work was previously nominated for deletion in 2008, saved later on in that year - but no substantial work has been done on it since. The article is still pretty much uncited (pretty sure that one link is dead anyways, redirecting to somewhere vaguely related). The article is an orphan, and the only article Wikipedia has concerning 'disaster risk management.' The otherwise closest is Disaster risk reduction, which is hardly a gem itself. Indeed, East Asia is the only region that has its own article, even if we consider Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management. Unless we are to spearhead creating an article like this for every region, I suggest deleting this article. The only non-deleting option that comes to mind is to merge this article with Disaster risk reduction and that article to be merged with Emergency management. I am willing to discuss additional alternatives. ”

Thanks, Tradereddy (talk) 14:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Tagging this project as inactive

I am marking this WikiProject as inactive, per WP:INACTIVEWP, because the last time that a topic received more than the original post was in June 2012 (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management/Archive 3#Algo Centre Mall collapse) and, besides a couple 3-post discussions (OP-reply-reply from OP), the last time a topic on this page had much discussion was in February 2011 (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management/Archive 3#Infobox) and before that was in 2009. Overall, it looks like there hasn't really been much activity in this project since 2008.

Of the participants in this WikiProject, found in Category:WikiProject Disaster management members

• User:Blood Red Sandman, a handful of edits since 2012
• User:Jsoroko, handful of edits, none since 2012
• User:Kierant, under 50 edits since February 2014 (they do not appear to be associated with disasters)
• User:Rxnd, 51 edits since 2012
• User:Veriss1, not very active in last couple of years aside from a handful of pages
• User:Wikiwriter706 last edit was in 2009

AHeneen (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Retarget the shortcut Wikipedia:DISASTER

I wanted to create a shortcut to the naming convention concerning the use of the word disaster in article names Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events)#Descriptor. The shortcut Wikipedia:DISASTER is used for this wikiproject, but 'only 7 pages use that link, out of which the two AfD pages (one for the archived discussion and one for the day's AfDs) appear to have meant the policy. I came here to suggest the retarget, but since there clearly hasn't been any significant activity in nearly 7 years, the retarget seems appropriate. AHeneen (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Federal Emergency Management Agency critics

Category:Federal Emergency Management Agency critics, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:36, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

RfC notice: Use of flag icons on genocide-related articles

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons#Use of flag icons on genocide-related articles.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Suggested Move of High-Importance Article

I have recently suggested the move of high-importance article for this project, the West African Ebola virus epidemic, to a new name. If anyone wants to look at the proposed move, it is at Talk:West_African_Ebola_virus_epidemic#Requested_move_9_May_2016. Just wanted to let this project know in case they have any discussion to add. Thanks, Gluons12 (talk) 20:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC).

Removed project banner from 2016 Berlin attack

I removed the banner from the talk page of that article as I believe it to be out of scope. Samsara 04:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Missing topics list

My list of missing topics about emergencies is updated - Skysmith (talk) 13:26, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cold War II#RfC: "Novel risks and measures for preventing escalation" section

Hello, I'd like to ask you to share your thoughts about whether or not the section "Novel risks and measures for preventing escalation" of the article Cold War II should be removed or not.

Please comment on its talk page (within the next 3 days if possible).

--Fixuture (talk) 14:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management/Archive 3/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Disaster management, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed new category - oil train disasters

I'm proposing a new category named Category:Oil train disasters. There appears to be no comprehensive list of these particular derailments and collisions, nor even an article on what an oil train (oil shipped by rail) is. As I do not have an active user account, I cannot create the category myself, so I am proposing it here. Here's a chronological list (excluding a large number which are not notable enough for their own articles):

• Stéblová train disaster (Eastern Bohemia, Czechoslovakia, November 1960)
• Yaoundé train explosion (Yaoundé, Cameroon, February 1998)
• Viareggio train derailment (Tuscany, Italy, June 2009)
• Lac-Mégantic rail disaster (Quebec, Canada, July 2013)
• 2015 Mount Carbon train derailment (West Virgina, USA, February 2015)
• 2016 Union Pacific oil train fire (Oregon, USA, June 2016)
• Hitrino train derailment (Shumen, Bulgaria, December 2016)

It might be debatable whether to include trains carrying propane, or collisions between a passenger and a non-passenger train, such as the Callaway train crash (Minnesota, USA, March 2016). There are other, earlier disasters involving chemical spills such as the 1979 Mississauga train derailment. Please comment on whether to narrow the definitions. It can be discussed whether a broader or separate category should include these as well. 129.97.18.153 (talk) 22:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

(Late answer) We have Category:Train and subway fires. This does not contain the release of hazardous chemicals without a fire (nor freight train accidents without the release of any of contained dangerous chemicals, in case any are notable). Oil trains seem too specific to me, because many chemicals can burn and poison the vicinity at the same time. Accidents without an article of their own (notable by themselves or not) may be categorized and listed appropriately by adding the categories in a redirect page. An oil train would be nothing special among the transport of chemicals/fuel; many freight trains are mixed and contain tankers, containers, cars, bulk cargo, pallets etc. --Mopskatze (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2017 (UTC) P.S.: I have added some of the articles you listed to the fires category

Project reboot & project rename to WikiProject Emergency management

Hi y'all, I'm going to actively try a reboot of this project. As a part of that, I would like to rename the project to WikiProject Emergency management, per the primary article for the project being titled emergency management and that being the preferred term of the international association. Please indicate your support or opposition below. Additionally, please add your name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management/Participants if you are interested in participating with the project going forward. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 21:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Reactivate this WikiProject and/or rename "WikiProject Disaster management" to "WikiProject Emergency management"? Listed for RfC --George Ho (talk) 06:18, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Support

• Support as proposer. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 21:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
• Support per nom. --Scott Alter (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
• Support - focus less on the disaster (which could fall under many WikiProjects) and more on the response (the management side). Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 16:40, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
• Sure Ping us at WT:MED regarding health care related aspects. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:28, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Comments

• This increases the scope: "The name change indicates a change in orientation from specialized preparedness for single or narrowly defined categories of hazards toward an all-hazards approach that includes potential threats to life and property through environmental and technological hazards, and domestic and foreign attacks." the four phases of emergency management - FEMA Training StrayBolt (talk) 15:28, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
• Emergency management is the preferred name of the field. The name change has been brought up before (including by myself 8 years ago), but despite never having any opposition, the name change has never actually happened. I think it's finally time to proceed with the rename. However, I am doubtful the project will become significantly more active as a result - but it's worth a shot. --Scott Alter (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
• George Ho, why did you list this as an RFC? Anybody is allowed to WP:REVIVE any dormant WikiProject at any time. Any group can call themselves anything they want. If a couple of people started working here, and decided to rename the project to WikiProject Saving The World, it would be okay. Everything they've done is already approved by the guideline and does not require permission or consensus from outsiders. Whether a group forms and what they call themselves is nobody else's business. Please remove the RFC tag and leave these participants alone. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:29, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Removed RFC tag. --George Ho (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Article improvement

Please see Disability and disasters, a short article that I would like to expand and improve. My knowledge of disaster/emergency management is rather rudimentary so I'm looking for a subject specialist editor who would be intetested in working with me. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Please come and help...

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:2017 Washington train derailment#Requested move 21 December 2017, regarding a page related to this WikiProject. Your opinion and rationale are needed so a decision can be made. Thank you and Happy New Year to All!  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  12:29, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested article: Kiribati shipwreck

In January 2018, a ferry in Kiribati capsized and sunk, and 81 people are apparently still missing. I can't seem to find anything about this on Wikipedia, except for an entry at List of shipwrecks in 2018 which I added. Can someone create this article please? The disaster definitely warrants its own article, and not having it shows the Western-centrism of Wikipedia.

--Xwejnusgozo (talk) 14:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

@Xwejnusgozo:: I'll add it to the list of articles I'm considering doing, and to Skysmith's list. Acebulf (talk) 02:29, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

The article is now live at MV Butiraoi. Acebulf (talk) 02:19, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

List of articles that might fall under our scope

Hello all,

I have gathered a list of articles that don't have the Wikiproject banner on their talk page but are linked from templates that do (e.g. navboxes).

The list is long and arduous, and I've put it here. I'll be going through and pruning the list of false positives, and then i'll assess them. Any help in removing articles that don't belong to the Wikiproject would be great!

The list is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management/Acebulf_list.

Acebulf (talk) 06:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

2018 lower Puna eruption suggested to merge with 2018 Hawaii earthquake

There's an ongoing discussion about Merge from earthquake. According to WP:PM I'd like to notify this Wikiproject to get a wider range of opinions. --ThT (talk) 09:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   10:55, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

BOAC Flight 712

A discussion is ongoing at Talk:BOAC Flight 712#Katz which members of this Wikiproject are invited to contribute to. Mjroots (talk) 15:15, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Naming of articles about transportation accidents and incidents in the United States

I have started a discussion about the naming of articles about transportation accidents and incidents in the United States, specifically about whether or not to include the name of the state, at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States#Naming of articles about transportation accidents and incidents in the United States. As this proposal includes articles related to incidents relevant to this WikiProject, your comments are invited. Please comment there rather than here to discussion in one place. Thryduulf (talk) 00:51, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Passengers of the RMS Titanic

I opened a proposal to trim the passenger lists at Passengers of the RMS Titanic a few weeks ago. We've only received a few responses. so I'm reaching out to related Wikiprojects for more input. Editors are invited to join the discussion here. Thanks –dlthewave ☎ 21:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested article: Spanish toddler who fell down well

I don't know if this is the right WikiProject, but I think there should be an article covering the incident where a Spanish 2-year-old boy named Julen (some sources say Yulen) fell down a very deep but narrow well. This happened on 13 January and currently rescuers are attempting to reach the boy - it's not known if he's still alive or not. I believe this deserves its own Wikipedia article, and there are articles about similar cases in the past: see Kathy Fiscus, Alfredo Rampi and Jessica McClure.

The incident has seen extensive news coverage from around the world. Some examples:

• Spain toddler stuck in deep borehole near Málaga - BBC News
• Rescuers hunt for 2-year-old boy who fell into 360-foot well in Spain - CNN
• Rescuers search for toddler who fell into 110-metre well in Spain - The Guardian

Can someone create this article please? I can't think of an appropriate title, given that only the boy's first name has been reported in the media. --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

On 26 January the issue resolved when the search team found the child's body.

• Jones, Sam (26 January 2019). "Rescuers find body of toddler who fell down Spanish well". The Guardian.

@Xwejnusgozo:, this topic seems to pass WP:GNG and could have a Wikipedia article. You might draft one. Any attempt at a title is fine as anyone could change the title if there was a better idea. 2019 child falling in well in Spain could work. It seems like this incident got international news from multiple perspectives over a period of time. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

There is already an English article, Death of Julen Roselló. Here is the Spanish article Rescate de Julen Roselló

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Project developing wiki content of LGBT+ refugees

I am cross-posting here to share notice of a project to develop Wikidata information about LGBT+ refugees. Continue the discussion at Wikidata or French language Wikipedia.

• d:Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_LGBT#Projet:Ecrire_pour_les_droits/Marseille/bienvenue
• fr:Projet:Ecrire pour les droits/Marseille/bienvenue/Accueil

Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion about disaster policy for news

• Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Establish_a_more_firm_policy_about_the_notability_of_mass_shootings_and_other_events_for_WP:ITN_Suggestion

Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:59, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

RfC: terrorist incidents list criteria

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of terrorist incidents#RfC: List criteria. – Levivich 18:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Disasters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Disasters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Disasters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:23, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Kyoto Animation arson attack GA review in progress

Please consider helping out with fixing the items listed here. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:29, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

The article passed and was promoted! Thanks to Dekimasu for helping out and MX for pointing out areas of improvement. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Please contribute to RfC

I started an RfC concerning pointing to the template namespace in the COVID 19 navbox. See Template talk:COVID-19#RfC on linking to template namespace.  Bait30  ^Talk? 05:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

RfC on wording in the lead of 1976 Tangshan earthquake

There is an RfC on the wording of "ceased to exist" regarding the lead of 1976 Tangshan earthquake. All editors are encouraged to participate. Thanks. — MarkH₂₁^talk 07:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject COVID-19

I've created WikiProject COVID-19 as a temporary or permanent WikiProject and invite editors to use this space for discussing ways to improve coverage of the ongoing 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Please bring your ideas to the project/talk page. Stay safe, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

New article: Pandemic prevention

Hello, I created the new article Pandemic prevention. Maybe somebody here is interested in helping improve and expand it. Thank you. --Prototyperspective (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

RfC on bushfire seasons

There is an RfC on whether future Australian bushfire season article template start and end dates should use the official season or the beginning and end of significant fires. Please comment here --Pete (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

RfComments and contributors: CoVID shortages

Main article: Shortages related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic

Hello all, the Shortages related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic needs help. Lot of news is popping out this weeks and we are not enough contributors to process them. We need volunteers to read the news and write down additional content base on them. There is also meta-analysis to document : what impact this shortages and solutions will have in term of public policies, health care workers' health, etc. There is SO MUCH to collect on how to NOT manage a disaster. Where can we call for help ? Please have fun joining the push. Yug (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

March 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

At the request of Another Believer, I'm transcluding the Tree of Life Newsletter for this month, which features a story about WikiProject COVID-19. Enwebb (talk) 20:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

March 2020—Issue 012

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Newly recognized content

Argentinosaurus by Slate Weasel and Jens Lallensack Wolf by LittleJerry Horseshoe bat by Enwebb, reviewed by Chiswick Chap Cimicidae by Cwmhiraeth and Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Enwebb Coronariae by Michael Goodyear, reviewed by Dank Ardipithecus ramidus by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by starsandwhales Ooedigera by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by Hog Farm Bathyphysa conifera by Awkwafaba, reviewed by Chiswick Chap Calliphora vomitoria by Y.shiuan, reviewed by Jens Lallensack

Newly nominated content

Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations by Britishfinance Bathyphysa conifera by Awkwafaba Moniliformidae by Mattximus Disease X by Britishfinance Mandarin Patinkin by Rhododendrites

News at a glance

• A year of the Tree of Life Newsletter: Thank you to all the subscribers who have been with us from the beginning or have joined along the way, and to those who have contributed their time to producing this newsletter. I've really valued your ideas, copyediting, and willingness to be interviewed. Onwards and upwards!
• April marks the start of the GAN Backlog Drive, which continues through the end of May. The goal of this backlog elimination drive is to cut the number of outstanding GANs, in particular those which have been in the queue 90 days or more. All hands welcome, new and old.
• The finalists of the US Wiki Science Competition have been announced. Illustrating Wikipedia articles can be challenging, so these new images represent a chance to find suitable media for our articles. For all images uploaded in the Wiki Science Competition, see here and click "all images" in the upper right corner.

• 
  Fly's mouth and tongue (Microscopy)
• 
  Killer whales hunting a crabeater seal (Wildlife)
• 
  Fossilized tooth of a Squalicorax shark (Microscopy)
• 
  Flourescent coral (Non-photographic media)

A new WikiProject responding to the pandemic

The newest Tree of Life WikiProject is about a taxon that is dominating the headlines, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and its many effects. We interviewed Another Believer, the founder of WikiProject COVID-19.

This interview has been edited for length. Find the full interview here.

1. Please describe how you went about creating WikiProject COVID-19. What made you think a project was needed?

   I've been following the outbreak and editing related Wikipedia articles since January. I'm not particularly interested in infectious diseases or viruses, but I've been to China a few times and wanted to monitor the outbreak's impact on society as well as the government's response. For a while, I was casually tracking updates to the first couple pages about the outbreak. Then a pattern began to emerge as February saw the creation of separate articles about outbreaks in Iran, Italy, and South Korea. New Wikipedia articles continued being created in early March, and the outbreak was recognized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11. Knowing there would many more articles, lists, templates, illustrations, and other pages on Wikipedia, I created WikiProject COVID-19 on March 15. My goal was simply to create a temporary or permanent space for editors to collaborate, communicate, and focus specifically on content related to this ongoing pandemic. I'm a member of many WikiProjects and have created several before, but this one definitely felt more necessary and urgent. Most WikiProjects unite editors with similar interests, which is fine and serves a purpose, but I felt this project could have a much bigger real life impact. I don't think I was alone in my thinking; the project had 80 members by March 20 and 100 members by March 26.

2. Who or what was invaluable to getting off the ground?

   If I'm being honest, getting this project off the ground required little work on my part. All I did was create the space and post invitations to existing talk pages related to the outbreak. Editors joined the project very quickly; 30 members joined on the same day I started the project, and there were more than 50 participants one day later. I've been a daily Wikipedia editor for more than 12 years, and I've never seen so much interest in a project or content added to Wikipedia about a specific topic in such a short period of time. WikiProject members worked expeditiously to build a framework and hang a barnstar, tagging related pages, assessing content, and starting talk page discussions about the project's goals and scope. I'm thankful to the many editors who pitched in to get the project established, and I look forward to seeing how editors collaborate in this space as we move forward.

3. What are the short-term goals of the project?

   No specific goals have been posted to the project page yet, but I'd like to think members share a collective desire to ensure Wikipedia has accurate and reliable information about the disease and pandemic. Disinformation and misinformation seem rampant these days, so we're working to give readers around the globe access to accurate, objective, and possibly even life-saving information. Unlike some WikiProjects which may take a more historical approach to documenting certain topics, WikiProject COVID-19 members have the ability to mitigate the disease's spread in real time by arming communities with facts about outbreaks in their region as well as information about prevention, testing, vaccine research, societal impact, etc.

   

   Viewership of WikiProject Medicine, WikiProject Viruses, and WikiProject COVID-19 in the month of March 2020

4. What are the long-term goals? English Wikipedia has many of 'lumpers' who think there are too many projects already. The project has also inspired the creation of two portals, which I imagine caused some raised eyebrows in this trend of portal deletionism. What will come of the WP after the current outbreak subsides?

   After creating WikiProject COVID-19, a couple editors said I should have created a task force instead of a standalone WikiProject. I wasn't bothered. The number of 'thank you' notifications I received for creating the page vastly outweighed these critical comments. I knew the page I created was much needed, and I would be fine if editors decide to call the page by another name. I understand some editors think there are too many WikiProjects. No one's required to join WikiProject COVID-19, but the 100+ of us who have already joined invite you to help with our efforts, if you're interested. As for the project's future, I would be fine if editors decided to convert the WikiProject into a task force, or even put the project into retirement if the time comes. Given the level of interest and impact the pandemic has already had on a global scale, I have a feeling the WikiProject will be active for a long time.

5. Another criticism of the project is its narrow focus. It is focused on only one strain of virus, and the disease it causes. Even WikiProject AIDS is about two species of virus. Is the scope of the project too small? What would an expanded scope look like? Why would including another virus strain in the same species, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus which causes SARS, not be wanted? or is it wanted?

   Narrow focus? I disagree. The project may focus on a single virus and disease, but the pandemic has resulted in the creation of hundreds of Wikipedia articles documenting outbreaks in most countries and territories. There are pages covering the pandemic's impact on aviation, cinema, education, politics, religion, sports, and television, not to mention others related to the resulting economic turmoil. Additionally, there are hundreds of templates, charts, and other graphics. Who knows how many thousands of images and other media will be uploaded at Wikimedia Commons by the time this pandemic subsides? There's also COVID-19 WikiProject COVID-19 at Wikidata, and I wouldn't be surprised if similar spaces are created for other Wikimedia projects soon. Even if the focus is narrow, there's plenty of content for Wikimedians to improve and protect.

6. In your opinion, what should be the guidelines for creating a new project, as opposed to creating a task force or working under an existing WikiProject?

   I don't feel strongly about new project creation guidelines, or the differences between WikiProjects and task forces. Project members should decide what structure works for them and call themselves whatever name they prefer. I understand project construction requires maintenance and can come at an administrative cost, but we should be careful about discouraging editors from proposing new projects.

   Ideally, editors would only create a new WikiProject if at least a few others were committed to joining. I created WikiProject COVID-19 without conferring with others because I assumed the interest would be there. I encourage people to be bold and create project pages, but maybe ask a few other editors for feedback first. I'll let other editors worry about the guidelines.

7. What tools (templates, bots, etc.) are essential, or even just really helpful, for organizing and maintaining a successful project? What is something every WP should do, that maybe isn't doing now?

   I appreciate the standard WikiProject assessment framework. AlexNewArtBot and Article alerts have also been very helpful.

8. What have you learned about Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or COVID-19 during this process that surprised you?

   I don't have any sort of medical background, and I'm more interested in the pandemic's impact than details about the disease or virus. Most surprising to me has been the lack of preparedness for combating outbreaks by governments around the world, including here in the United States. I don't know how COVID-19's spread compares to other infectious diseases, but as I've watched the outbreak develop I've continually wondered why governments did not start preparing earlier. What was happening in China, Iran, Italy, and South Korea should have prompted action sooner.

9. What important things about 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic do you think folks should know and maybe have missed in the deluge of information coming at people?

   1. Know the most common symptoms: cough, fever, and difficulty breathing.

   2. Learn what behavioral adjustments you should make to protect yourself and reduce transmission, and remember to wash your hands.

   3. Get your information from reputable sources. I'd like to think Wikipedia editors are pretty good at this last bit of advice.

Thank you to Another Believer for your time, both in this interview and in this project. Interested readers can join WikiProject COVID-19. And please stay safe and healthy out there. --Awkwafaba

March DYKs

• ... that Calamagrostis intermedia is the dominant plant of the grassy páramo in Ecuador's El Cajas National Park? (March 1)
• ... that the blood-sucking bug Primicimex cavernis survives in a cave in Texas while the bats on which it feeds overwinter elsewhere? (March 2)
• ... that the worm Phyllodoce lineata is a predator and scavenger, feeding mostly on other polychaetes? (March 4)
• ... that the crested oyster has been eaten by humans for at least 6,000 years? (March 5)
• ... that larvae of the tube worm Hydroides ezoensis prefer to settle on a substrate already inhabited by other worms of their own species? (March 14)
• ... that the sea slug Berthella ocellata hides during the day and feeds on sponges such as Corticium candelabrum at night? (March 18)
• ... that the sea cucumber Actinopyga agassizii has five teeth surrounding its anus? (March 19)
• ... that unlike most soft scale insects, the adult female pyriform scale is able to move around? (March 20)
• ... that in Florida, winged termites are sometimes found stuck to wet foliage, buildings, or vehicles after rain? (March 23)
• ... that despite being known as the Kerry lily, the perennial plant has a much wider distribution outside Ireland? (March 24)
• ... that in 1725 Hans Sloane described a plant he called Prickly-Pole as the Jamaican tree species that was "the most fit to make Rods and Scowrers for Guns"? (March 25)
• ... that a deep-sea fish known as a black ruff was caught in a salmon net in the Firth of Forth and donated to the Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art in 1901? (March 29)
• ... that the flowering plant Gentianella anglica is found only in Great Britain? (March 30)

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Category:Medical outbreaks by country has been nominated for renaming

Category:Medical outbreaks by country and Category:Medical outbreaks by dependent territory, which are within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to "Disease outbreaks ...", along with about 185 of their sub-categories. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that August 2016 Aden bombing, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Emergency management, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Scope of list discussion

There is a discussion about the scope of the List of disasters in Great Britain and Ireland by death toll taking place at Talk:List of disasters in Great Britain and Ireland by death toll#Scope of the list. Please feel free to join in. Mjroots (talk) 11:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Representation of epidemics and pandemics on list pages.

I hope this is the right place to put this but I have noticed that in "List of disasters in [country] by death toll" there is inconsistent inclusion of epidemics and pandemics. The Australia Australia UK/Ireland articles include them, the NZ article has them on a seperate list on the same page and the US article excludes them completely. On a similar note the UK/Ireland article does not include wartime attacks but the Australian article does.Ææqwerty (talk) 11:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

This project described in The Washington Post

• Andrews, Travis M. (7 August 2020). "Covid-19 is one of Wikipedia's biggest challenges ever. Here's how the site is handling it". The Washington Post.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Coordination of disaster evacuations during epidemics

California is now simultaneously dealing with wildfires and the COVID-19 pandemic. The historic policy of preemptive wildfire evacuations to keep access roads clear for emergency vehicles will conflict with pandemic quarantine procedures. Similar circumstances are likely to arise during the Atlantic hurricane season. Administration of evacuation centers will be challenging. Is there an article describing coordination of evacuation procedures with disease outbreaks? Thewellman (talk) 16:21, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Thewellman: No. Wikipedia rarely has intersectional articles.

In the meta:Wikicite project Wikidata editors are experimenting with sorting out academic literature. I asked user:Daniel Mietchen what he thought of this, as he develops content for disaster response. He could not find wildfires and epidemics but he did have this to show for COVID-19 and wastewater problems.

• Scholia profile for COVID-19 and wastewater

Eventually the Wikicite project expects to be able to surface intersections between topics like in this example. Good luck if you follow up on the wildfires. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

I've drafted an early version as Emergency evacuation procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. I will be looking for additional sources as the situation unfolds in California, and I encourage others to edit this article. Thewellman (talk) 21:48, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Texas electricity crisis

Is there an article on the 2021 mid-Feb Texas rolling blackouts without end? We have one for 2000–01 California electricity crisis -- 65.93.183.33 (talk) 09:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@65.93.183.33: I was unable to find one, though I believe an article could be made. Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 02:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikiversity link

The Wikiversity's School of Fire and Emergency management link is broken. It appears that the destination has been removed; so should the reference be withdrawn altogether? 5CR1PT (talk) 21:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Weight of rudder theory of Silkair Flight 185

Please see Talk:SilkAir_Flight_185#Introduction:_Suggest_to_remove_last_part for questions over WP:WEIGHT of the rudder malfunction theory of Silkair Flight 185. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Disaster management assessment work

To Whom it may Concern:

I just finished assessing all of the unassessed articles in your project list. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Prairie Astronomer ^Talk 14:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 in the United Kingdom timeline

A discussion is taking place at Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom#RfC_for_refactoring_of_"Timeline"_section about whether the timeline which is seen by some as being too long for the page should be moved to another article, cutdown or kept as it is. It needs a wider range of opinions to reach a consensus so feel free to add your view if you're interested. Llewee (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 GAR

Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. CMD (talk) 16:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

GAR for 2008 Sichuan earthquake

2008 Sichuan earthquake, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 04:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

2021 Nigerian boat accident needs help

This article is currently unable to go on ITN because it's only a stub. Would anyone be interested in expanding it enough to be ITN-eligible? It sounds like there's at least 100 deaths, which is pretty high and deserves more than a stub. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Bug-out Bag merger to Survival Kit

Hi all,

I wanted to post the merger I have proposed for bug-out bag into survival kit. The discussion can be found on the discussion page in survival kit. Please do outline your thoughts there.

For reference only, here are my main points on the page;

• Duplication; items and reasoning for both bags are outlined in each other. As "survival kit" can be an umbrella term, this overlap can be removed by merging bug-out bag into this page.
• Overlap; although there is a difference, these are similar concepts but with contested agreements over their boundaries. This contestion is currently missing as they exist in different pages and merging would help outline this further for the reader - providing context over different names and terminology.
• Content; the survival kit page hosts a number of different types of survival/ emergency bags (including holding a section for the bug-out bag itself), holding precedent to host other types of bags such as the bug-out or emergency kit. Both pages are starter pages with the survival kit page being the larger one. Merging content into it would help increase its quality and scope of content.
• Notability; there seems to be little academic or neutral literature that outlines "bug-out bag" as a specific notible topic of seperate coverage. Indeed, the terms "survival", "emergency" and "bug-out bag" are used interchangeably as well as being contested (see point 2). I would suggest a single article would better serve the reader to understand this contestation in terminology and centralise information. Jamzze (talk) 09:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:COVID-19 lockdown in Italy#Requested move 7 October 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:COVID-19 lockdown in Italy#Requested move 7 October 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 12:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

GAR

Radioactive contamination from the Rocky Flats Plant, a page within the scope of this project, is up for Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. Please see Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Radioactive contamination from the Rocky Flats Plant/1. Your help to improve the article or give feedback would be most appreciated! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Renaming of Astroworld Festival crowd crush

Hello! We're having a discussion on whether to rename Astroworld Festival crowd crush to Astroworld Festival disaster. You can participate here if you're interested. Best, Pilaz (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Protests in Minneapolis regarding the trial of Derek Chauvin#Requested move 15 November 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Protests in Minneapolis regarding the trial of Derek Chauvin#Requested move 15 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SkyWarrior 02:07, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Requested move 2 December 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster#Requested move 2 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 16:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2021#Requested move 12 December 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2021#Requested move 12 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 17:10, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Llangennech derailment

Should the Llangennech derailment article use {{Infobox oil spill}} as well as {{infobox public transit accident}}? Mjroots (talk) 15:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Great Fire of London - FAR nomination

I have nominated Great Fire of London for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Renerpho (talk) 06:22, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Featured Article Save Award for Great Fire of London

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Great Fire of London/archive2. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Tan-Sahsa Flight 414#Requested move 25 February 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tan-Sahsa Flight 414#Requested move 25 February 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 18:46, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Managing reporting on violence

In America there are shootings regularly, and this one recently. 2022_Buffalo_shooting

I would like to share again that there is an effort at Wikidata at d:Wikidata:WikiProject Humanitarian Wikidata to manage a list of such events. To the extent of anyone's interest there are things to do at the Wikipedia and Wikidata level. I know a lot of people edit these. Should we talk more about general best practices? Who would be interested in joining such a conversation? Bluerasberry (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

February 2015 North American cold wave listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for February 2015 North American cold wave to be moved to February 2015 Eastern North America cold wave. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. Graham (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hurricane Juan Featured article review

I have nominated Hurricane Juan for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Merge request at Munich Massacre

There is a merge request at Talk:Munich Massacre that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Any input would be very welcome! Felix QW (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

1995 Aigio earthquake peer review

Hello, I have listed the 1995 Aigio earthquake for Peer Review at Wikipedia:Peer_review/1995_Aigio_earthquake/archive1 as prep for FAC, and I would greatly appreciate it if everyone could leave some comments on what can be improved in the article. Thank you, SamBroGaming (talk) 01:31, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Great Fire of Rome, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

GAR notice

2007 Balad aircraft crash has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:2012 Middle East respiratory syndrome outbreak#Requested move 1 January 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2012 Middle East respiratory syndrome outbreak#Requested move 1 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. echidnaLives - talk - edits 02:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Buncefield fire

Buncefield fire has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Femke (alt) (talk) 08:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

FAR

The article 1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash is currently under featured article review. You can leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article review/1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash/archive1. Desertarun (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash Featured article review

User:Deserarun has nominated 1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)