Talk:Tsunamis affecting the British Isles

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

Questions[edit]

A few questions: The lead mentions three tsunamis yet only two are listed. Why? Also the date of the Cornwall one in the paragraph does not match the date in the section title. Why would a tsunami in Cornwall affect Loch Ness? Rachel Pearce (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The third one was the Bristol Channel floods, 1607 which I removed as it has never been conclusively proved to have been a tsunami. One theory is that it was caused by an earthquake off the coast of Ireland, but others are that it was simply a freak coincidence of storm surge and high tides. I'd be happy to see it listed here as a possible tsunami, but not confirmed as such. To be honest I don't think this article has much value and I'm tempted to request it be deleted. Of course, someone could put some serious work into wikifiying it, adding appropriate citations etc., but I don't have the time (or inclination in this case) --TimTay (talk) 23:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed[edit]

What's up with the edits like these. How is 1610 BC possibly 7,000 years ago? Is it 1 metre or 3 metres high? This article needs sources. Cannot just write unourced claims down as fact. • Anakin (talk) 13:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt if this is salvageable[edit]

User MartinMorris (talk · contribs), who created this and made no less than 28 edits to it, went increasingly off the rails with hoax articles and has been indef-blocked. I don't think we can place much trust in anything he did. There are major problems here: 1610 BC = 7,000 years ago? Two-foot thick layers of "tsunamite"? The Cornwall one seems to be fact, the Bristol one arguable... I don't really think there is enough salvageable here to make a respectable article. Comments welcome, but I plan to do a bit of research and then take it to AfD. JohnCD (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, I have found quite a bit about the first one - 1610 BC is nonsense, it was about 5000 BC but it was real. I now plan to expand the article - but anyone else who gets there first is welcome... JohnCD (talk) 15:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's an interesting, if obscure topic. Perhaps it should be expanded to Tsunamis in the North Atlantic? Drutt (talk) 20:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sparks[edit]

Is this an error or do tsunamis actually produce electrical phenomena? Drutt (talk) 20:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?[edit]

Only one country gets it's own page about "tsunamis in.." and it's the UK, a country that hasn't really had any? Either someone writes a "tsunamis in..." for every other area on the planet or this gets merged into Historic tsunamis, anything else is madness. Bienfuxia (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible writing[edit]

For Example:

1/ What is more or less inevitable meant to mean FFS? How can something be more inevitable than inevitable? And less than inevitable must be not inevitable at all.

2/ In the 1990s, they started realising that the Cumbre Vieja volcano in La Palma, in North Africa in the Canary Islands.
 - they started realising - have they stopped realising yet?
- in La Palma, in North Africa in the Canary Islands - so North Africa is in the Canary Islands (not many people know that).

Lots more examples - play spot the rot. ----194.72.120.131 (talk) 14:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"More or less" is a perfectly acceptable - though not necessarily encyclopaedic - phrase in English. It is not a requirement of WP editing that you should be able to write perfectly formed prose. Why not try to improve the article yourself? Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meteotsunamis[edit]

There are a few notable meteotsunami events, list taken from an article in The Geographical Review by Haslett & Bryant:

  • 23 November 1824 Chesil Beach Local Large wave and The Fleet gale/hurricane overtopped a gravel barrier and penetrated inland, destroying houses and a church and causing up to sixty deaths
  • 23 April 1868 Burton Unknown, but not Villages Bradstock and associated with a inundated, Lyme Regis local storm waves up to 9 meters high
  • 17 October 1883 Severn Unknown, but linked Large wave Estuary to a local storm overtopped sea defenses and flooded lowlands
  • 18 August 1892 Yealm and Linked to a A series of Fowey thunderstorm/squall large waves Estuaries in the English damaged Channel boats
  • 16 December 1910 Ilfracombe and Local gale Wave up to 9 the meters high surrounding struck area Ilfracombe and penetrated in land, causing damage
  • 20 July 1929 Folkestone to Squall line in the Large wave Brighton English Channel struck beaches, killing two people
  • 31 July 1996 Westward Ho! Probably a squall Large wave and line in the Bristol struck, Pembrokeshire Channel bowling people over up the beach at Westward Ho! and causing damage along the Pembroke coast
  • 13 February 1979 Bristol Distant Atlantic A series of Channel and storm large, the western long-period English waves Channel overtopped coasts Chesil Beach and sea defences

I will try and find more sources and add these events into the article if it survives AfD,--Pontificalibus (talk) 15:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following AfD, propose move.[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:34, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Tsunamis in the United Kingdom → Tsunamis affecting the British Isles – As Tsunamis effect geographical regions rather than political entities we should use a geographical region instead of a political one. Mtking (talk) 01:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The title clearly needs a geographical region. I'm not sure why the closer of the AFD thought there wasn't consensus for a move to this particular title. Several of the participants supported it and no-one opposed it. Dingo1729 (talk) 19:24, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support geographic would be better, covering the entire archipelago. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 05:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as per above. Borsoka (talk) 18:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above and my comments in the AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 00:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

1858 North Sea tsunami[edit]

How is Pegwell Bay in North Kent? And where are the references backing up this claim? If this did occur it seems more than likely to have been a meto-tsunami due to the thunderstorms preceeding the wave, even if this hasn't been confirmed. Shouldn't this be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.177.158 (talk) 01:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no account from The Netherlands of any flooding in 1858. SiemEik (talk) 14:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jersey earthquake and Tsunami in 709 AD[edit]

Can someone add in details of the Jersey earthquake and Tsunami.

Some accounts suggest fault moved many metres. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.90.134.146 (talk) 23:02, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tsunamis affecting the British Isles. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:33, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tsunamis_affecting_the_British_Isles&oldid=1209882197"