Jump to content

Talk:2011 Van earthquakes

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

more info

[edit]

Lots of info here EdwardLane (talk) 14:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BBC tv news just reported 264 confirmed dead - they said AFP reported that the interior minister had said 264 people had been killed. I can't find the source online in text anywhere - the highest I can see is 239. EdwardLane (talk) 10:15, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

cyprus

[edit]

as far as the UN and the International community are concerned, there is no such entity or concept as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Please rectify the mistake and replace it with "The Turkish Cypriot Community". Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.73.242 (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP is NOT an institution of the UN or the "intl community" de facto states are notable eough for WP so theyre notable eough for wikipedia articlesLihaas (talk) 08:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Main shock depth

[edit]

According to this article 1, the initial shock which I presume would be the main shock is at a depth of 7.2km which would be confusing since the magnitude is also 7.2. Depth section should only consist of the main shock's depth and not aftershock. YuMaNuMa (talk) 10:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Countries or regions

[edit]

why there is several country names under the "Countries or regions" in infobox? Is it because s.body feel the earthquakes over there too? Yakamoz51 (talk) 17:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A few days ago I removed some of the countries listed in the infobox under 'area affected', but I see that they are back, joined by several others. I don't think that this is supposed to be areas in which the earthquake was 'noticed', but rather countries in which there were significant earthquake effects, which at the moment is just Turkey. I intend to remove all countries other than Turkey again unless someone can convince me otherwise. Mikenorton (talk) 17:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually from some news I saw that some part of Armenia and Iran also shaken too much. But I removed all countries, since they are not "affected". Yakamoz51 (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, saved me the job. Mikenorton (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Near east?

[edit]

The first segment uses the term "Near East", but the wikipedia page on "Near East" says:

The term, Near East, was in use exclusively during the 2nd half of the 19th century. In the 1st half of the 20th century it began to share the geographical stage with the term, Middle East. Since then Near East and Middle East have been approximately synonymous. Near East is used in some historic contexts and Middle East in others with no major semantic difference. Many modern agencies have chosen to abandon this terminology altogether as less appropriate to practical work in international relations. Others choose to retain it, but often with little consistency in its application.

It seems to me that this page shouldn't use this term, but I'm not an expert on the subject.     — SkyLined (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I In my school there is "Near Eastern Studies". Under this they study eastern Europe, Balkans, and west Middle East countries, including Turkey. Yakamoz51 (talk) 15:57, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you're suggesting: should the Near East page be changed to say that the term is still commonly used, or should this page on the earthquake be changed to say "Europe, Balkans and west Middle East countries"? And how reliable/representative would you rate your school in this regard?     — SkyLined (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The term Levant could be useful here, particularly combined with South Caucasus. Mikenorton (talk) 09:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded accordingly, comments? Mikenorton (talk) 10:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish Area

[edit]

There seems to be a minor edit war going on over the inclusion of the word "Kurdish" in relation to Van. Van is a predominantly Kurdish province - see the Wikipedia article. Steve3742 (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is no need to emphasize this, the thread is about the earthquake, if anyone is interested in ethnic distrubiton of Van they can go to city's own article. Just leave it as "city of Van", which is supposed to sound neutral enough to end the minor edit war, or something is wrong even with it? Will it really hurt if we aren't going to add "Kurdish that", "Kurdish this" before any city from around those cities of Turkey? Anatolian1071 (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image of impact

[edit]

I have found 2 very suitable images for the article but both images are currently CC Non-commercial. At the moment I'm attempting to get permission for the non-commercial attributes to be waiver. 1 2

as far as I know, there isn't a Wikipedia policy against watermarking of images. YuMaNuMa (talk) 12:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 9

[edit]

November 9 earhquake is not a aftershock! Yakamoz51 (talk) 15:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in some cases there are debates over whether an earthquake is a totally independent event, an aftershock, or a triggered earthquake. Before the conclusion (if any and ever) is established, I suggest that let's change the section title back to the neutral "The earthquake of November 9, 2011". It can be further separated (or not) as an independent article in the future if needed (or if conclusion is reached that it is an independent event, or if some kind of agreement is reached on the status of the section, etc.) Qrfqr (talk) 16:51, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's declared by official and also academic sources that this earthquake was not an aftershock. Utku TanrıvereMessage 11:36, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What sources? These would need proper citation.
If the second is considered connected with the first, but not an aftershock, it would most likely be a doublet earthquake. There is a presenting such cases (see the {{Infobox earthquake}} documentation), but that would depend on a source stating it is a doublet.
This article needs more work with its sources, and their citation. Note that some of the secondary sources (e.g., "Earthquake report") are mostly just repeating material from the authoritative sources (such as the USGS-ANSS catalog); going directly to the authoritative source would be better. Note also that although the old links to the USGS pages (such as PAGERCAT) broke when the USGS revised its webpages, the content is (mostly) still there, and even updated, just under slightly different urls. Note again that one reason for using the new {{cite anss}} template is that any future changes can be handled en masse in the template, and article level revisions won't be necessary. Ask if you have questions. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2011 Van earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:58, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2011 Van earthquakes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2011_Van_earthquakes&oldid=1196600990"