This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles
It is requested that an image or photograph of Amritsar train disaster be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The spelling for the name of the location of the incident varies according to the media house. The spelling varies Jaura, Joda, Jodha... Phatak (crossing).... all these refer to the same location and are similar sounding, but if this can somehow be mentioned in the article... Joda is used the most it seems in online news articles and is currently what the wiki article uses, according to The Hindu cite. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 22:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Role of Indian Railways in the Amritsar Train Disaster
The Indian Railways has termed the disaster as a trespass on its tracks. But the fact is Indian Railways has a major role to play in the occurrence of this disaster. The railways is feeling the guilt. This can be seen in the recent news item published in the Dainik Jagran [1] which states that the top management of Indian railways has issued guidelines to its Loco pilots, Guards, Station masters, Gang-men, Gate-men and all other staff of Indian railways to raise immediate warnings should they perceive that there is crowd on the tracks. The loco pilots and Guards have been issued directions that they must pass their train at very slow speeds and continuous horn sounding while passing through densely populated areas. This shows that it was a clear fault of the Indian Railways due to which the disaster happened. Dushera has been celebrated since antiquity. The railway authorities are well aware that Dushera evening is the busiest evening in India in any year. Still they ran their train at full speed through the middle of the town.
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The spelling of Navjot is wrong in the "Response" section of the page. It is written as Navkot whereas the true spelling is Navjot. Buntupsc (talk) 02:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Recently I came across the phenomenon of hindsight bias and I wondered whether this bias might also be present in this Wikipedia article...
According to the hindsight bias, in retrospect it is overestimated how likely, predictable and/or inevitable an event was, and obviously a study has even found it in Wikipedia articles on accidents/catastrophes: doi:10.1007/s00426-017-0865-7
So I wondered whether that could be the case with this article, too, – and whether the disaster is presented as more predictable and inevitable than it actually was before. Maybe we should search again for information that would have spoken against its occurrence?
Apparently, the hindsight bias occurs because of a retrospective focus on information that spoke FOR the event while ignoring (or not taking seriously) information that would have argued for another outcome, which then, of course, leads to the impression of inevitability and foreseeability... This is why I wondered whether this article might
also be affected by hindsight bias and should thus be checked again for this? --2A02:810D:1300:38E5:F496:B1F5:C7B7:E27D (talk) 09:37, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)