Talk:2014 Nepal snowstorm disaster

A news item involving 2014 Nepal snowstorm disaster was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 20 October 2014.

Wikipedia

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 14, 2020.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nepal Mid‑importance

	Nepal portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image

I object to the picture claiming to be "Annapurna seen from Annapurna Base Camp". This caption is incorrect - the mountain shown is actually Annapurna South. Please add an accurate picture or significantly change the article. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lew Sheen (talk • contribs) 01:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DIY. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quote

The quote "it's wiped out trekkers so it's news" is incorrectly attributed. It was made by Alan Hinckes, not Ngamindra Dahal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.188.16.137 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 October 2014‎

Hello, this is my first time, I am on the editing side of Wikipedia. I got footage of this event, since I was among the people who got stuck at High Basecamp during the snowstorm. If you guys want to integrate them, please detail me about this process.

Thanks - now corrected. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties

We need to make sure that - if we do need to have this table - the country figures add up to the total (which they don't at present) and that sources are provided. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:17, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The total of dead and missing should be 39. I don't know to do that. Someone changed the last table row from Poland to France, news reports indicate the three were Polish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.244.95.112 (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For all of this article, all editors should say what their sources are. It's no good just saying that "news reports indicate" something - you must provide the link. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tune up and improve

Thanks to all the editors who have contributed to the creation of this article. Well done. At the same time I have to say that it could be better. It is at times redundant, wandering and overly dramatic; more like a news report than an encyclopedic article. This often happens when an article describes a recent event and when its created by multiple people adding things in different places..... I've done some editing today, starting at the top and would like to do more but thought I would also open a line of communication with other editors to gain consensus as needed. I'll go ahead with minor editing but thought I'd open discussion on some larger issues here, one by one. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)-- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. I'm involved in a lot of off-wiki stuff at the moment and have little time to spare here, so if you want to take a lead, I'd say go for it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've done some organizing and summarizing to combine redundant info that appeared in various parts of the article. I also organized for chronology and flow.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Block quote from trekker

I'd like to remove the quote from the trekker. To me all it does is add drama to the article, like a sound bite from the homeowner as the local TV channel covers the burning of their house. WP is summary style and undue weight is being given to the personal ramblings of one of 100 individuals involved in the storm. I'd like to remove it. Thoughts? Comments?-- — Keithbob • Talk • 15:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It seemed relevant when I started the article, just based on emerging news stories, but as time passes we need to take more of an overview, as you've been doing. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]