Talk:Mosul Dam

Archives

A fact from Mosul Dam appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 November 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the foundation of the largest dam in Iraq is subject to so much erosion that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has warned about the risk of a collapse that would kill up to 500,000 people?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/November.

Wikipedia

Iraq Mid‑importance

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dams Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dams, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dams 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.DamsWikipedia:WikiProject DamsTemplate:WikiProject DamsDam articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conflicting Information

Two separate sources claim different months in 2016 that Trevi started the repairs to the dam. Al Arabyia states that it began in September 2016, while Voice of America claims that it was October 2016. Both dates are mentioned in the Wikipedia Page, so should there only be one listed, and if so, is there some consensus on which one it should stick to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.158.126.55 (talk) 09:32, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfounded reports

Cut from article:

Subsequent investigation found the reports to be unfounded but found the nearly 500 dam workers to still be at work nearly a month after pay had stopped being distributed, with security being provided by militia under the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.^[1]

Could someone please tell me what part of the ref said that the reports were unfounded? And also, can we rewrite this section so it doesn't look like Saddam hadn't intended to blow up the dam?

Better yet, let's have all the details (and all the controversy, if any):

Did Saddam plan to destroy dam?
- If so, why didn't he? (Iraqi locals + US military?)
If Saddam had destroyed the dam, what might have happened?
- A big, sudden flood that would kill a lot of people?
- Nothing much

I need help with the research and writing of this section. --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks a little suspect to me. The article says the dam was "wired" to blow up. Well, you would need some massive explosives to blow up a dam, not just wires. I think the issue probably should be mentioned but I don't think we can say for sure what Saddam's intentions were. Also WP is generally not supposed to be about things that might have happened but didn't. Steve Dufour (talk) 10:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's really useful when editors don't remove the citation for a paragraph and then demand a citation for every sentence in that paragraph. There was a problem in the wording as compared to the referenced source, but correction was made more difficult than needed by removing the citation for that source. - Banyan Tree 17:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my hasty edits. Next time I will discuss the passage's problems first here on the talk page, okay? --Uncle Ed (talk) 22:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That quote from Richard A. Muller, apparently some sort of general, links to a physicist. Does anyone have the right name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bermy88 (talk • contribs) 07:46, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Physician is right. I expanded his title/purpose more to make it clear. Good find.--NortyNort (talk) 20:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Four towers

On the photograph which is used in the infobox you can see four gigantic towers of the power plant. For what are they for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.237.174.171 (talk) 23:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They are surge tanks.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citation issues

Citation #5 is a broken link. It is, however, still available via archive.org / the Wayback Machine - http://web.archive.org/web/20030808092931/http://enr.construction.com/news/front2003/archives/030505.asp. Should the original citation be left in tact or should it be converted to a usable link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justindemaris (talk • contribs) 21:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done The preferred way of doing this, which I have followed, includes the archive link but retains the original too. However, in order to do this, I first had to convert the citation to use the cite web template.--greenrd (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mosul Dam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:39, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

^ Cite error: The named reference ENR was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[ENR-1] Cite error: The named reference ENR was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[1]