Jump to content

Talk:2019–20 Australian bushfire season/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Updates needed

This page needs to be significantly updated. The bushfires we're experiencing here in NSW have already claimed 3 lives, at least, and more than 100 homes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:23E4:C00:308A:9FF9:B98A:8D31 (talk) 08:04, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes. It's a very newly created page, and needs a lot of (ongoing) work. Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia anyone can edit. Please free to do what you can to improve it. HiLo48 (talk) 09:50, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Needs dates

Hi, most of the content is undated. To whoever has contributed, please go back to your sources and add dates to events. Thanks and regards, DPdH (talk) 02:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Wrong Date

The day of Catastrophic fire danger declared in Sydney, the Hunter and the Illawarra was 12th of November, 2019, not the 13th as you have it. [1]

References

  1. ^ https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/catastrophic-fire-danger-what-you-need-to-know-20191111-p539c3.html

International Opinion

The page currently has a twitter-sourced quote from an unemployed activist as representing the entire section of "International Opinion". It seems to me terribly unencyclopedic to include such a thing. I removed it with the comment: removed unencyclopedic content. Primary sourced Twitter quotes from 16 year old aren't suitable for an "International Response". If included it needs better sourcing to show notability of views/a range of views It was reverted by User:Escape Orbit with the comment: Opinion of obviously notable person, regardless of age.

This is a ridiculous standard not used anywhere else. Are we now including random activist twitter posts as sources and reverting their removal as long as the person is notable? This strikes me as very unencyclopedic. I will be removing it again in two days if there are no objections. We are here to quote in a balanced way what reliable sources say, not to give undue weight to the twitter posts of activists. Phil153 (talk) 16:51, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

It would seem to me that her opinion is very notable, and your descriptions of her are irrelevant. If you are looking for secondary sources. Here are a few that are all agreed her comments are notable. I'll add one to the article;
If you have concerns that the section needs a better range of opinion, then please add others, suitably sourced. Removing sourced content to balance out what the article lacks elsewhere doesn't seem like a sensible approach. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:02, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't see why the opinion of someone who is famous for having an opinion is more important than actual action, or spoken responses form national leadership. I have added (sourced) content about three foreign countries that had over 50 specialist firefighters each in Australia over Christmas. --Scott Davis Talk 23:50, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Animals and plants killed?

The article currently opens with a sentence that ends destroyed over 2,500 buildings (including over 1,300 homes) and killed at least 19 people[6][7][8][9] as well as half a billion wild animals and plants.[10] (my emphasis). Listing people killed is of critical significance, and buildings destroyed and livestock killed is certainly noteworthy for giving scope. But, is listing the number of animals killed helpful? Does this include rabbits, mice, bugs, and microscopic things? I assume it doesn't include all of these, since the number would be too low by orders of magnitude. Even if this is -- somehow -- useful information for the readers (who are left to interpret the meaning of the number on their own) listing plants killed has to be even more unhelpful. Unless some justification is soon given, I will delete this. --A D Monroe III(talk) 22:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I think it is nonsense to mention plants killed, but wildlife has been devastated, with entire colonies (and possibly species) wiped out. The fauna loss is sufficiently notable for mention in the lead. WWGB (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
Good call Monroe. The statement by Prof Chris Dickman was that approximately 480 million animals had been impacted, not killed. (See https://www.wthr.com/article/nearly-half-billion-animals-impacted-australia-wildfires). He pointed out that many would be displaced, while indeed many were killed. But his statement was misquoted for headlines, and went viral internationally as "killed". Ptilinopus (talk) 13:08, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Once again someone has inserted this misinformation into the Overview, citing a Northern Territory newssheet which has simply parroted viral headlines. I refer again to the source in my comment immediately above, that 480,000 animals were impacted, not killed, with the comment being from Prof. Chris Dickman. Can we get it straight again? Ptilinopus (talk) 12:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

New South Wales fire services cuts?

The article states (Political Response), "Decisions made by the New South Wales Government, led by Premier Gladys Berejiklian, to cut funding to fire services despite the repeated warnings of fire chiefs that the fire season would be one of the worst to date, were initially criticised.[144]". This claim has been found by the ABC Fact Check (Australian Broadcasting Commission) to be invalid ("does not stack up") (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-05/fact-check-are-nsw-firefighters-facing--budget-cuts/11747396). The source quoted ("Independent Australia") is a private purveyor of news, and very much POV, despite assertions to the contrary. Unless this can be properly verified from reliable parliamentary sources, rather than partisan political sources, it should be removed. Ptilinopus (talk) 12:59, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I read the citations, and I agree that it isn’t definitive. But it’s also not a clear matter. The budgets are comparing an initial budget to the mid year review. Fire services were cut, but not in the previous 12 months, but earlier. The mid year figures are larger but also include a compensation for fire fighters making work-related cancer claims. It is unclear if this will carry over into the future or if it is for just this year. The sources don’t say the claims are incorrect, and it is hard to tell. I think it is fair to say that the government has been criticised for cutting funding, but that it is fairly difficult to determine. The article includes a quote to the contrary, so it shows the discourse pretty well.Vision Insider (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Should the "International response" section be condensed?

Other than the first paragraph about other countries sending over firefighters to Australia, the rest of the section is just the reactions of random politicians (none of whom are heads of state) and celebrities (none of whom have any relation to Australia). Should these paragraphs stay as is, be condensed, or be removed? ParadiseDesertOasis8888 (talk) 03:33, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

There's not really much substance in the section beyond the first paragraph. I think the line about P!nk donating half-a-million dollars is worth keeping though. That sort of generosity will have some impact and help the firies; unlike the political bumbling about that will see no action. Mr rnddude (talk) 03:59, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Potential project and article restructure

All.

This article may be subject to major restructure.

Please note this earlier discussion.

Please note this current discussion. Comments, views, and suggestions to that discussion please.

Aoziwe (talk) 04:07, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Western Australia burnt area

The article in the Overview summary box states that 1,200,000 hectares have been burned in Western Australia, but no source is given. In the Western Australia section of Regions Affected, only 3 fire zones are mentioned, Geraldton, Yanchep (and extensions), and Norseman. Area burned (13,000 hectares) is mentioned only for the Yanchep fires. The sources cited in the article for the Geraldton fires mention only 20 hectares. Probably more, but not mentioned. The Eyre Higheay and Coolgardie-Esperance highways are cut by fires, but the latest figures I can find give a figure of 270,000 hectares for these fires (Norseman fires) (see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-01/road-closures-cause-nullarbor-travel-chaos/11836476). This would total 283,020 hectares. No sources I can find justify the figure of 1.2 million hectares. It may be so, but I should like to see some sourced evidence. Ptilinopus (talk) 03:34, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately many states don't publish burned area data in an easily accessible way like other states, I suspect the data for WA was likely calculated from a figure reported on a national level (5.9M) and they subtracted out the other known states. EnchanterTim (talk) 09:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
After searching for a source myself and looking at the edit history I think the person did subtract the other states from the 5.9M figure but they forgot about the NT where satellite imagery shows a large number of fires. I've changed the table to reflect your figure of 283K ha and a note on the NT. EnchanterTim (talk) 10:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
DFES is quoted here as saying 1.2m at 24 December 2019: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2019/dec/24/australia-fires-volunteers-bushfires-new-south-wales-south-australia-victoria-live-latest-updates?page=with:block-5e0170138f08c3972263fcc1#block-5e0170138f08c3972263fcc1 a lot of which is in the Kimberley TRS-80 (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Good find I've updated the figure. EnchanterTim (talk) 04:36, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Deaths 

Some IPs seem to be inflating these figures. The official count seems to be 9, though page shows 11? Source [1] Says 9. 220 of Borg 23:23, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Plus 2 more in Cobargo, so 11 so far? Per https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/nsw-fires-live-multiple-bushfires-burning-at-emergency-level-on-new-year-s-eve-20191231-p53nrr.html  220 of Borg 08:08, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
There's nothing "official" about material from news.com.au. These figures will have uncertainty for some time, partly because it's a moving target, and also because the figures will be supplied to the media on the state by state basis, and we have a national article. And there is actually no evidence that article is talking about anything but NSW. HiLo48 (talk) 08:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Just to continue this whilst raising another point, I have noticed that with the edition of the Jan 5th death in Batlow, people have increased the totals to 25 however I cannot find one reference that supports this and I have read masses of articles trying to confirm it. Including this new addition I have still only officially seen the total stand at 23 & 24 so I just wondered if there was reference to back this up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darce98 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Reference stability

I note that editors are using reference urls of the form "https://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/fire-information/major-fire-updates/mfu?id=nnnn" for particular pieces of information. While these references are highly accurate at the time, as far as I am aware they are continuously updated as the fire progesses, so will no longer reflect the information at an earlier time? Aoziwe (talk) 10:59, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Ref / Cite

If your going to update major details on this page (Amount of dead, HA Burnt, etc) please add a REF / Cite very close your edit. I am one of a few people running the Huggle Anti-Vandalism Bot, and this page keeps turning up for review. If you can't post a change without SMH, NineMSN, etc then please don't. If conflicting numbers from news sources (eg 26 Dead, or 22 Dead) then just post one that matches your edit so that it is not reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amckern (talk • contribs) 19:10, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH in the politics section

I deleted the following text Politics section:

Furthermore, scientific research has cast skepticism on the role of prescribed burning in preventing bushfire in Australia, with peer-reviewed research suggesting that prescribed burning plays a limited role in saving property and stopping bushfire under extreme conditions in south east Australia, that weather and climate play a primary role in fire behaviour, and that prescribed burning is known to often propagate states of heightened flammability due to moisture dynamics.[1][2][3][4] In Wadbilliga National Park and the Bega Valley district, fires were observed to burn through agricultural land and forest recently affected by planned and unplanned burns.[5]

... because it does not directly address the 2019-20 bushfire season, and hence were incorrect use of WP:SYNTH and WP:PRIMARY. I replaced it with a mainstream article which does directly address the causes of these bushfires and the role of hazard reduction. Adpete (talk) 02:32, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cawson, Jane (15 September 2017). "Fuel moisture in Mountain Ash forests with contrasting fire histories". Forest Ecology and Management. 400: 568–577. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2017.06.046.
  2. ^ Taylor, Chris (26 July 2014). "Nonlinear Effects of Stand Age on Fire Severity". Conservation Letters. 7 (4): 355–370. doi:10.1111/conl.12122. hdl:1885/66701.
  3. ^ Gibbons, Phil (18 January 2012). "Land Management Practices Associated with House Loss in Wildfires". PLOS ONE. 7 (1): e29212. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...729212G. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029212. PMC 3260958. PMID 22279530.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  4. ^ Bowman, David (22 June 2016). "The relative importance of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in the decline of obligate seeder forests". Ecological Soundings. 25 (10): 1166–1172. doi:10.1111/geb.12484.
  5. ^ NSW Rural Fire Service. "Fire Information". NSW Rural Fire Service. Retrieved 3 January 2020.

Kangaroo Island

Why is there no mention of Kangaroo Island???? South Australia counts you know129.127.32.138 (talk) 06:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Why? Because nobody has written it yet. This is a collaborative project, and Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia anyone can edit, This includes you. Feel free to go for it. HiLo48 (talk) 06:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Yea, I was also surprised. Because, its been going on for a few days now. I noticed there is a Wikipedia page, 2008 Kangaroo Island Bush Fires. But nothing 129.127.32.138 (talk) 07:00, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
129.127.32.138 (talk · contribs) Kangaroo Island bushfires actually, which may now need to be moved to 2007 Kangaroo Island bushfires, the Kangaroo Island page also has no coverage of current (2020) bush fire. 220 of Borg 02:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Page move as mentioned above done. 220 of Borg 02:20, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Kangaroo Island page updated to include current bush fires, here. 220 of Borg 02:46, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Oh that is good. Thanks for your hard work. 129.127.32.138 (talk) 03:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Record-breaking drought?

The infobox lists record-breaking heat and drought as a cause. But the reference does not say it is a record-breaking drought: it is record low rainfall in some areas, but that is not the same as record-breaking drought. Without supporting discussion in the article, I don't think it should be in the Infobox. Adpete (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

The decision to include the 'record-breaking' heat & drought (lack of rainfall) is also driven by a large number of articles reporting on this on a national average level (see links)
Not (just) lack of rain. It is an event of prolonged shortages in the water supply.... Some areas received more rain than last year, but still much less than average, BUT the very hot dry winds (much more than ever before) that come the day after, and often the day before too, rain events sucked the ground and country side even drier than before the rain event. Case in point is where we live. We have dozens of trees already dead, and dying on our land which have been established for many many years.... Aoziwe (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
While not every part of Australia is experiencing record droughts or record high temperatures the large number of areas that did were issued severe/extreme/catastrophic fire danger indexes which has clearly played a major role in the severity of those fires. But I certainly agree the article warrants a section about the climate lead up that made those fires as bad as they were. EnchanterTim (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Morrison fires

User:119.17.58.22 on 6 January 2020 at 14:47 added a secondary name for the fire season, being The Morrison Fires, without a reference. User:129.127.32.138 reverted the edit several minutes later. At 17:13 the words were reinstated by User:1.128.109.136, again, without a reference; reverted by User:WWGB at 17:23. A Google search of the term "Morrison fires" reveals that Change.org are driving an online petition, located at ..../p/scott-morrison-name-the-australian-bushfires-the-morrison-fires, to rename the fires. This appears to be a politically driven campaign and, as Wikipedia does not advocate a partisan approach, should not be used in this article. Please note for future reference. Rangasyd (talk) 06:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, i reverted it as there were no sources. Also, it looks like as if Scott Morrison is responsible for the fires.129.127.32.138 (talk) 06:55, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
It's blatant vandalism and agenda-pushing. Of course it should be removed immediately. Anyone can create a Change.org petition, so it is not even close to being a WP:RS. Adpete (talk) 11:46, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It currently has a massive 727 supporters. When it gets to 727,000 supporters it will be notable enough to have a due weight two sentences mention in a public opinion sub section. Aoziwe (talk) 12:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It was done by some bloke on reddit as a joke. https://www.reddit.com/r/straya/comments/el0cq1/i_took_it_upon_myself_to_name_the_fires/ 2001:8003:6C01:CB01:ED4C:F9B3:DB42:27EF (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It appears over the past couple of days there have been a few more instances of this or similar naming edits made to this article. I know I reverted one myself It appears to be consistently new user accounts or IPs. At what point should we be considering semi to try and avoid this POV-pushing name vandalism? Hamtechperson 04:56, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I think there are enough sensible editors watching this page at present for such edits to be quickly reverted. Hopefully the culprits will soon get bored. HiLo48 (talk) 05:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Satellite pictures

File:Kangaroo Island before burn scars - 2019-12-16.jpg and File:Kangaroo Island after burn scars - 2020-01-07.jpg can be used in this article, in my opinion. Ahmadtalk 10:43, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Previously I moved the 'Fire potential' section down to the 'Causes' section as I felt they should be read together, however it was moved back by @Aoziwe. I now think those sections should probably be restructured with most of the climatic content in 'Causes' being put in 'Fire potential' section and 'Political response:Causes/Criticism' be renamed to just 'Political Debate' with content about prescribed burning, climate change denial/acceptance, budgets, holidays etc. Anyone agree/disagree? EnchanterTim (talk) 11:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You actually moved it into the Political response section as its own sub-section. Hence my concern. It was neither a response nor political. It pre-empts the fires by many months, and I believe is apolitical. But, no matter.
I do not think the fire potential should be mixed up with a (some would argue an irrational ideological) debate on causes. There is no debate that independent well considered advice was given by very experienced highly regarded practioners, and by technical and scientific experts and academia, well before the fire events occured. The advice of the "fire potential" (not debated) was regardless of the "actual cause" (is debated). Aoziwe (talk) 11:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
PS I do agree that the "political debate and response" needs to be separated from "causes", but that is a separate matter again. Aoziwe (talk) 12:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes I agree, but I argue that the warnings published by the Bureau of Meteorology (and possibly those by CSIRO years in advance) are precisely what that section is about and should be moved leaving the debating and other things in the political section. EnchanterTim (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
I have reread the latter section again, and perhaps I am missing something, but I cannot see anything about fire potential as such, apart from the three BOM decile images. Yes, I think these would be better in the Fire potential section. I agree that further content specifically about warnings and advice regarding the fire potential / risk should be in the now earlier section, but anything about underlying causes should be kept separate, so that the fire potential / risk is not muddied. Aoziwe (talk) 12:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Is there any number on injures?

This article doesn’t mention how many people were injured. Can someone find any sources on how many people are injured? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CycoMa (talk • contribs) 20:45, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Utterly impossible to ever determine. Who would know to count someone who fell off their roof while hosing it? WWGB (talk) 10:26, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
They might here? Aoziwe (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Looking at previous Australian bushfire seasons it appears common to count and list those injured, although the figures are harder to find than deaths many news groups are reporting firefighter injuries and major civilian injuries. EnchanterTim (talk) 12:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2020

Suggest adding "Accidental" to one of the causes of fires in summary box. [1]

QLD, Binna Burra bushfire - lodge burnt down, fire started from cigarette butt.

  • Added to infobox.

Also: Defence Force: [2]

  • This one is still conjecture?

Other Edit: suggest adding other other references to Arson - Further, "charges laid" mean they are no longer "alleged".

[3]

  • It is still an allegation unit "proven" in court?

RFS Volunteer: [4] 2001:8004:1180:671:FC11:E883:BB35:2BC2 (talk) 12:57, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

  • This one is already in the infobox.

References

  1. ^ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-13/binna-burra-fire-an-accident-teenagers-discarded-cigarettes/11699474
  2. ^ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-12/gold-coast-hinterland-bushfires-believed-to-be-sparked-by-adf/11694280
  3. ^ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-19/queensland-bushfires-ten-children-allegedly-start-fires/11717444
  4. ^ https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/rfs-volunteer-charged-with-allegedly-lighting-seven-fires-deliberately-20191127-p53ejo.html

If you have any concerns re above please advise. Aoziwe (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Causes

Hello. In the section about the contributing causes, it may be interesting to mention the following:

Increased frequency and severity of bushfires is an expected consequence of the climate crisis. In 2007, the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report projected that "By 2030, water security problems are projected to intensify in southern and eastern Australia and [...] production from agriculture and forestry is projected to decline over much of southern and eastern Australia [...] due to increased drought and fire."[1]

Thank you. Doringa Slunpucts (talk) 10:39, 8 January 2020 (UTC).

References

  1. ^ IPCC AR4 SYR 2007, Summary for Policymakers, page 11.

Not sure how this particular quote fits. The opening sentence is very broad, and is already covered in many places. The latter part of the quote is forecasting another ten years out and is about economic impact rather than cause? Aoziwe (talk) 22:44, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

UPDATES TO AFFECTED AREAS

This figure stands at 10,700,000 hectares as of 8 Jan but hasn't been updated since. Does anybody have current information on this? It's suddenly difficult to find accurate figures anywhere, there's been a real burying of the figures of late anywhere I look. -- trying to work out how to sign this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.202.194.48 (talk) 06:43, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Don't know where to find info. It might be nice to get this information from a primary source for now, instead of relying on newspapers who might not want to keep this number updated. Signing can be done by using four tildes at the end of your comment. (~~~~). Femke Nijsse (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Economic impact

Do we need a section on the economic impact of these fires? See Black Saturday bushfires#Economic impact.

"The economic damage from the bushfires devastating Australia’s eastern seaboard is likely to exceed the record $4.4bn set by 2009’s Black Saturday blazes, Moody’s Analytics has said." Source

I have heard lots of media reports of cancelled travel/holiday bookings, stock and crop losses, etc. 220 of Borg 08:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Yep - feel free to start one.  Aoziwe (talk) 22:37, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Not really my area of expertise, and I think it's been done now by another editor.--220 of Borg 08:04, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Citation needed under Political Response/Disinformation

Citation needed for the sentence “Various bots, trolls and questionable news sources....that Islamic State was somehow responsible or involved.”

I’m new here not sure how I can help. Have seems examples re Greens & Islamic State. Should I add references & link to these examples of disinformation? Gerard.roberts (talk) 07:14, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

The sentences before and after the sentence I mentioned have citations. But they don’t refer to the info (which is quick substantial) in the sentence I’m talking about. Gerard.roberts (talk) 07:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Have seen examples. Gerard.roberts (talk) 07:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

quite substantial Gerard.roberts (talk) 07:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Has been fixed now I think. Aoziwe (talk) 09:50, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Aoziwe. I think the footnote #291 should be at end of the sentence. The Guardian article says “eco-terrorists are trying to spur action on climate change by manufacturing a catastrophe.” In other words, a false flag operation. Gerard.roberts (talk) 10:14, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2020

Citation needed under 8.2 Disinformation The following sentence needs citations (I provided a reference for the first citation): 

“Various bots, trolls and questionable news sources spread fake news about the fires including that prescribed burns to thin vulnerable areas had been blocked by environmentalists or the Australian Greens,[1]that fires would clear land to benefit a high-speed rail project,[2] that the fires were a false flag operation deliberately lit by climate change activists,[3] and that Islamic State was somehow responsible or involved.”[4] Gerard.roberts (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2020 (UTC) Gerard.roberts

References

  1. ^ Readfearn, Graham (12 November 2019). "Factcheck: Is there really a green conspiracy to stop bushfire hazard reduction?". The Guardian, Australia edition. Retrieved 14 January 2020.
  2. ^ Needs Citation
  3. ^ Needs Citation
  4. ^ Needs Citation
All but one have been done and I have tagged that one as such. Aoziwe (talk) 10:16, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Ref now covers all three relevant items. Aoziwe (talk) 12:16, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Consistency please

Hi Cement4802 and Femkemilene.

When you change numbers, and refs for them, can you please change them everywhere they occur, eg, in the Lead text, in the Overview text, in the Overview table, and in the Overview table notes, and anywhere else, and check the adding up too.

Thanks. Aoziwe (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Will do, sorry. I believe numbers have changed after I edited, so I won't do editing now. Femke Nijsse (talk) 12:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Aoziwe (talk) 14:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Bumcheekcity. Can you please do the job properly too. You have currently left a mess. Aoziwe (talk) 14:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I think I have been able to clean up. Aoziwe (talk) 23:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2020

In the Mid-North Coast section from November 12 2019, the fire that swept through Hillville destroyed 2 houses on neighbouring properties and hundreds of acres of Kiwarrak State Forest, as well as the wildlife it contained. After a wind-change, the fire swept back through to the east on November 14 2019 and destroyed another house and outbuilding on one of the same properties from the 12th before continuing towards Krambach. Over that week, the fire threatened, but did not destroy several properties within Hillville burning up to within 3 metres of various houses. Author: Ashleigh Douglas, first-person source as the property discussed is my family property. Raginginsanity (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

House destroyed in Hillville, NSW on 12th November 2019
The Hillville fire destroyed this house and machinery shed on a farm in Hillville on 14th November 2019

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Raginginsanity (talk • contribs) 12:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but please see WP:PRIMARY in regard to recording personal experience. Wikipedia, if we record your decription above, would become a primary source, contrary to policy.

We could use the photographs though. Did you have a preference as to where they might be used.

Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 14:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I have added in the two images adjacent to the paragraph referring to Hillville. Thank you for the two images. Aoziwe (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Be aware of named references

All.

If you are removing content, or replacing references, please check to see if any of them are named, ie, <ref name="SOMETHING LIKE THIS"> ... </ref>. If it is being used somewhere else, ie, <ref name="SOMETHING LIKE THIS"/>, you need to make sure the name stays defined somewhere, perhaps on another instance of its use instead.

Aoziwe (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Comparisons would be useful

To understand the size of these fires it would be useful to compare their size with previous Australian fires as well as international. Skytalk (talk) 04:20, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Have a look at Bushfires in Australia#Major bushfires in Australia. To date 2019-20 is not yet any where near some previous years, eg 1974-75, which was over 100,000,000ha. Aoziwe (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

I have left a Talk note about the 74-75 fires at Bushfires in Australia article. The concern is that the figure quoted includes savanna fires. These are pretty much annual events that burn across enormous land areas. If this becomes a precedent, then the bushfires where life, property or infrastructure was lost will be swamped by grassfires where none of these things were in danger. To complicate things, there were non-savanna fires in that season of some importance. There's no real guidance on this issue: some sources include grass fires in the categorisation of bushfires, others restrict it wooded habitats. Do you have any thoughts on the topic? Prime Lemur (talk) 13:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

As an afterthought: I have noticed that some savanna fires have already started in Nth Aust. It probably won't be a significant year for savanna fires, as they're usually associated with high rainfall. The idea of adding on savanna fires to total area burned this year would seem to me to diminish the scale of this bushfire season-to-date. Prime Lemur (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I have started to note the difference. See this edit. But it needs a lot more explanation. Aoziwe (talk) 23:48, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I spent a short amount of time trying to tease apart the different sources & their figures for the 74/75 season, and it felt like trying to untangle a box full of Christmas lights. It'd take more time than I have free. I do think the article proper could benefit from its own section on Aust savanna fires, bc they're absolutely fascinating in their own right (to me, anyway). The area burned most years, and the uniquely fire-dependant habitat certainly makes it noteworthy. As an anecdote, when I was 18, I travelled by bus (!) from Brisbane to Darwin. Having been delayed for 6 hrs in Tennant Creek by the heaviest rain I've ever seen, the driver was pretty keen to crack on. Still a few hours out of Darwin, we came up on a savanna fire burning on one side of the road. On the PA, he announced we were going to drive straight through the fire. He added: "Don't worry folks, there's no danger, you couldn't even brown toast on one of these [fires]." Over the next hundred km, there were alternating patches of burned and unburned land. It wasn't until a decade later I learned the savanna is intentionally burned most years in a patchwork fashion by state authorities. Anyway, sorry to bore you with that. Thanks for your work on this article. I'll get back to my orchid edits. Prime Lemur (talk) 08:51, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment - just letting people know these are being proposed for deletion due to a spurious argument that they might have been taken from Facebook (despite the uploader nominating them as their own work, and uploading other images (with no issues) of the same areas of Sydney where these photos are taken from. Bookscale (talk) 09:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Images added in other languages

in German (Nachmittagssonne in Gosford, New South Wales in November 2019).
In Indonesian (Asap kebakaran hutan yang dilihat di langit kota Perth pada November 2019.)

I found in South Coast sub-section and Western Australia section two images above are added but they use another language, one about Nachmitgagssonne in German sentence and smoke effect in Perth in Indonesian sentence. Can you replace them with English sentences since it is English Wikipedia and any sentences that written in languages other than English must replace with that English word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.67.42.41 (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done - language fixed (I hope). Aoziwe (talk) 10:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Area burnt figure

Most current news sources estimate the total area burnt to be around 17 million hectares, or 16.8 million more precisely. Where did the 18 million figure currently presented on this page come from? Does it add up to that figure as a total of the figures from each state? Not saying it's a wrong figure or anything, just a bit confused - Cement4802 (talk) 10:55, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

It is the total of numbers provided by this reference as in the table in the Overview section. Yes the title says 17 but it adds up more than that. If you have a more accurate more up to date reference please feel free to make changes accordingly, but please make the change consistently throughout the article, as per above Consistency please. Aoziwe (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Update celebrities who donated

Can someone added celebrities that donated in the Donations section because I found new information from Sindo News in Indonesia. Information stated like this (translated from Indonesian)

Similar link also found in Australian media Jay Park donates $30k to Australian bushfire effort — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.67.42.3 (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
With other celebrities donating one million dollars or more, I don't think a $30,000 donation is that noteworthy. WWGB (talk) 03:15, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree that $30,000 isn't really notable enough compared to some of the other celebrities like WWGB has said. Maybe if it was in the six digits than we might be talking but it's not really enough to be notable. HawkAussie (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Agree. I've added some more today – philanthropists, corporates, 'celebrities', and sportspeople – all sourced from an ABC News article that uses A$500K as the cut off. I believe that this is a reasonable threshold. Rangasyd (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Sakura CarteletTalk 21:19, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Homes destroyed

Some sources are reporting 161 homes destroyed in SA but I can only find 151 by location.

Some sources are reporting 48 homes destroyed in QLD but I can only find 45 by location.

Can anyone clarify, fill in the gaps, etc.? Aoziwe (talk) 05:14, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Homes vs houses

Someone has changed all mentions of "houses" to "homes". I doubt this is accurate in every case. Particularly in the coastal holiday resort townships, at least some of the houses burnt would not be permanent homes, just houses occupied from time to time by holiday makers. I'd like to recommend a policy for this and similar articles of using "houses" consistently. HiLo48 (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Yep it was me who made the change. Yes you are 100% correct. Some of the dwellings would have been "holiday houses". However, as I was going through a lot of references they all seemed to refer to "homes", not "houses", so to keep good faith with the source material, I changed the wording to "homes". As far as I am aware the very significant vast majority would have been "permanent homes". Aoziwe (talk) 10:02, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2019–20_Australian_bushfire_season/Archive_1&oldid=937314087"