Talk:2013 Seddon earthquake

Earthquakes Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of earthquakes, seismology, plate tectonics, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Zealand Mid‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name

Aren't these earthquakes being generally referred to as the Seddon earthquake(s) rather than Cook Strait? Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look and did Google searches using quotation marks for the following terms. Note that this is totally skewed due to the 1855 earthquake. But it does show that 'Seddon' is more common than 'Cook Strait'. Schwede 66 00:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think name of article should follow common and offical usage. I support change of article name to "2013 Seddon Earthquake".Rick570 (talk) 21:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

search term	Google hits
Wellington earthquake	24,800
Seddon earthquake	726
Cook Strait earthquake	131

The "Cook Strait quake" is the more accurate description. If you look at this map, you will see that the epicentre of the majority of aftershocks are neither land based in Seddon nor Wellington but sea based in the cook strait. --BrianJ34 (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Government website [1] reference the quake to Seddon and while it is locating in Cook Strait their's is the official name. It is more likely to be referred to as the Seddon earthquake in the future. NealeFamily (talk) 21:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Seddon Earthquake" makes no sense. The epicentre was 25 km away. The so-called "Lake Grassmere" earthquake was much closer - 10 km. These unconventional names make no sense. I suggest they be called the Malborough Earthquakes or the Cook Strait Earthquakes, or even the Wellington Earthquake as Wellington is the closest urban area.Edwinhermann (talk) 07:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The media and common usage have now named it the Seddon Earthquake so that is what it is. Wikipedia has to follow that because otherwise the article may not be easily found. for example see this: [2]Rick570 (talk) 09:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Seddon earthquake" is not only incorrect (the epicentre was not in Seddon, nor even on land for that matter), but it does not follow usage. For these reasons the article should be renamed "Cook Strait Earthquake":

Geonet, the authoritative source for New Zealand Earthquakes refers to it as the "Cook Strait Earthquake" -- see http://info.geonet.org.nz/display/home/Cook+Strait+Earthquakes
The Earthquake Commission, the New Zealand government authority responsible for earthquake claims, also uses the term "Cook Strait Earthquake" -- see http://www.eqc.govt.nz/cook-strait
GNS, also an official source for seismic activity in New Zealand, also refers to it as the "Cook Strait Earthquake" -- see http://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Our-Science/Natural-Hazards/Recent-Events/Cook-Strait-Quakes
Much of the recent media also uses the term "Cook Strait Earthquake" -- see http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/214882/sharp-cook-strait-quake-felt-widely http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/482550641--4million-in-cook-strait-quake-settlements and http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/278070/6000-claims-cook-strait-quake-damage for examples.

As I have shown, both authoritative sources and media reference the earthquake as being the "Cook Strait Earthquake" and for that reason the article should be renamed accordingly.Edwinhermann (talk) 07:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sequence

Is the list of earthquakes meant to be not in chronological order? There were two fore-shocks, one 5.7 on Friday 19th at just after 9am and then a 5.8 on Sunday just after 7am. Or am I not getting what the roman numeral numbering system means 121.73.56.214 (talk) 08:35, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so now what?

Do the new series of quakes get a separate article, or are they regarded as the same series of quakes (in which case, they probably belong in here)? If separate articles, presumably they will be named "July 2013..." and "August 2013...". BTW, I agree with the comments above about renaming this the "2013 Seddon earthquake". The "Cook Strait" name doesn't seem to have gained any traction in the media or elsewhere. Another possibility would be "2013 Marlborough earthquake". Grutness...wha? 13:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC) (PS - best wishes to anyone caught up in the shaking)[reply]

I see that this has sorted itself. Yes, all the best from me, too. Schwede 66 23:44, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]