Jump to content

Talk:2023 Africa floods

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


Merger proposal

[edit]

Both the floods in South Kivu and the floods in western Rwanda are near Lake Kivu, so due to both events being extremely close to each other in both location and time, I think this page should be merged into an article titled 2023 East Africa floods Quake1234 (talk) 16:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Jim Michael 2 (talk) 16:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by BorgQueen (talk) 22:21, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Tails Wx (talk) and Sherenk1 (talk). Nominated by Tails Wx (talk) at 01:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023 Africa floods; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - question
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Tails Wx and Sherenk1: Saw this in the queue so I thought I'd give you a review. Article looks all good, I believe the "when?" tag can be overlooked as there is no date mentioned in the source. Could you bear to shorten the hook slightly? My suggestion is ... that after the 2023 Africa floods, relief efforts to help victims of the flooding disaster were disrupted by continuous heavy rainfall? I think it sounds a bit snappier. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 18:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Schminnte, thanks for the review! And, I think that hook is good! Tails Wx 18:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good to go then. Promoter, please use ALT1: ... that after the 2023 Africa floods, relief efforts to help victims of the flooding disaster were disrupted by continuous heavy rainfall? Schminnte (talk • contribs) 18:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Schminnte: This article has been merged. 69.118.237.29 (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up 69.118.237.29. I would like to have some discussion on this before I fail this DYK. @Quake1234: could you please comment on the merge rationale for this? Leaving a merge proposal open for less than an hour before closing does not seem very prudent to me. I would have at least expected it to remain open for some time, or for a courtesy ping to the DYK nomination. Actioning a merge with only one support (with no rationale) doesn't sit right with me. I would have considered a hatnote preferable, as the article was referenced well and could have existed fine in its own. @Onegreatjoke, Jim Michael 2, Tails Wx, and Sherenk1: pinging other involved users. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 08:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Schminnte: What seemed to have happened was that their was originally this article and another article detailing some floods that killed over two hundred in south Kivu, DRC. The merger proposal seemed to come out of an opinion that these floods we're part of the same storm as the Rwanda-Uganda ones and thus could be merged. And with one support, Quake instantly merged the two articles together (though, they merged the rwanda-uganda article, which had some substantial words, and merged it into the south kivu flood article, which was a stub at the time). Once merged, the article became about these floods. But for some reason, Quake randomly just decided to change the article's scope from being about these floods to being about all floods in the entirety throughout the entirety of 2023. I don't know how to feel about this personally. The merging, name changing, and scope changing in the span of like two hours just gave me tonal whiplash. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To avoid extending this discussion here any further, I am going to open a discussion of merge on Talk:2023 Africa floods. All parties are encouraged to join. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 20:51, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All links were changed to the new article, in spite of the fact there is consensus for a split.47.23.6.178 (talk) 22:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to exercise my best judgement here and suggest that this nomination needs another review, due to the split. This is nomination is quite the mess and does not even point to the correct article any more! @Tails Wx, Sherenk1, and Blaylockjam10: ping now involved users. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 09:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the split article, 2023 African Great Lakes floods, is a mess, and how none of the links point there, I think it’s best to fail this DYK. 69.118.237.29 (talk) 21:11, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, yes. I will fail this one; maybe something with the split page could be done? I'm not sure, on second thought it's better just to be done with this nomination. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Schminnte, that's fine, per the points made by the IP! Tails Wx 23:13, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of merge

[edit]

Yesterday, a merger of the pages 2023 Rwanda and Uganda floods and 2023 Africa floods was actioned. This merge was actioned at 17:27 UTC, less than one hour after the discussion was started. In the mean time, only one !vote had been given, with no rationale. No courtesy pings were given to the editors of the article or people involved in the DYK nomination (myself). I do not see this as a fair merge, let alone a sign of consensus.

In terms of content, this article is largely based on the Rwanda and Uganda floods article, as seen by this (rather janky) Earwig's comparison. My view is that there is coverage of the Rwanda floods individually, so an individual article is justified. I think both articles can coexist, as this is more of a "summary" article. A hatnote would suffice to provide a link to the Rwanda and Uganda floods article. In short, I am leaning towards thinking the merge should be reversed. The merge was obviously rushed and gave no time for discussion. I hope we can find consensus on this issue. (courtesy pings @Tails Wx, Sherenk1, Jim Michael 2, Onegreatjoke, and Quake1234:) Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:10, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's much more complicated than that. 2023 Rwanda and Uganda floods was the longer article. It & 2023 South Kivu floods (a DRC stub) were merged to form 2023 East Africa floods because they appear to be one event. The scope of the article was widened to cover other countries & the article was moved to 2023 Africa floods. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't appreciated that it was that complex. I can follow the logic of merging "South Kivu" and "Rwanda and Uganda" (even then, South Kivu should have been merged in to the other), but I don't quite follow the logic of merging it into a summary article, when the independent article is notable?
@Jim Michael 2 Could I ask what your opinion on using a hatnote to link to a re-split Rwanda and Uganda article? It's definitely the most notable aspect of the floods, has independent references, even the Background and Aftermath sections of this article are almost completely focused on the events in Rwanda. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:38, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which one are you describing as the summary article? If the nearby South Kivu flood is part of the same event as the concurrent ones in Rwanda & Uganda, it makes no sense to separate them. 2021 European floods & 2022 Africa floods aren't split. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The way I see it, 2023 Africa Floods is a summary of the entire event, as it summarises the events in many countries. Like is done multiple times in 2022 Africa Floods, I think as the floods in Rwanda and Uganda attained the most coverage, it would make sense to use a hatnote to link to them. I'm more concerned about the pace of this merge anyway, which was very rushed. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 08:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be portraying the floods in Rwanda & Uganda as one event which is separate from the floods in the other African countries. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting proposal

[edit]

I propose re-splitting the floods from May 2023 out of this article into a stand-alone article titled (1) May 2023 East Africa floods, (2) May 2023 Africa floods, or (3) 2023 Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda floods. This was previously named 2023 Rwanda and Uganda floods, which was renamed to the 2023 East Africa floods. This was then merged into this article without much discussion. Majority of deaths documented in this parent article are from Cyclone Freddy. Splitting the article for floods in Rwanda, Uganda, and DR Congo would be best as it would clearly pass WP:GNG (as it did pre-extremely fast bold merge). Elijahandskip (talk) 18:45, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The DRC is in Central Africa; Rwanda & Uganda are in East Africa. A better title is needed. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 10:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the German title I just listed the names of the three countries, which is a bit long, but I think it's the best option Lupe (talk) 14:04, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's probably best, and in that case the month shouldn't be in the title. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lupe: Apparently all of the countries are part of the African Great Lakes region, so a title could reflect that. However, if the flooding is centered around Lake Kivu, something like 2023 Lake Kivu floods could potentially work. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 17:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support the split but Oppose the proposed title as the DRC is in central Africa Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for new options: I have added a second and third name to the split proposal. Courtesy pings to Jim Michael 2, Onegreatjoke, and Lupe, Blaylockjam10. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nr. 3 (The floods already started in April and it's not all in East Africa) Lupe (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: I am ok with either title, but my preference is now option 2. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2023 African Great Lakes floods, if we're limiting the scope to in & around the Great Lakes. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2023 African Great Lakes floods, most natural and concise name (especially compared to something like 2023 Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda floods). Infinity (talk - contributions) 21:28, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So is the split happening? Is the DYK passing? --108.58.27.76 (talk) 22:56, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no experience in splits, so I'm just waiting for it to be finalized before i pass the DYK. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 07:05, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2023_Africa_floods&oldid=1215414089"