Category talk:Natural hazards

Much tidying of categories and one big new category
I've been tidying some of the categories. Mainly concentrated on the Natural Disasters and tidying that up, though inconveniently the category is called Natural Hazards, which is not quite right. Grouping the Natural Hazards and Natural Disasters together feels right though. Spent some time creating a new Wildfires category using the listings in Historic Fires. These categories called "Historic 'X'" are annoying though. Like "Historic Floods". Who's bright idea was that! A better name for the category is just "Floods". Also, there is actually an old category called "Natural Disasters". It is possible to make historical events that were actual natural disasters into a subset of natural phenomena that may or may not have caused disasters, but things look a bit too tangled to sort out easily. Anyone have any ideas? Carcharoth 02:14, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Merge tag
Regarding the merge tag that suggests merging this category with Category:Natural disasters, I was the editor who originally set up this distinction. If you look through Category:Natural disasters, you will see that most of the articles are, or should be, about actual events. By contrast, this category groups together general articles about natural hazards, talking more about the science and "how" of the events that can cause disasters, rather than the details of an actual event. In other words, this is a "subject" category, while the other one is a "historic" category. As long as there are sufficient cross-links between the two categories, I think it is useful to keep these categories separate. Carcharoth 08:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * To my understand, the word "disaster" and "hazard" mean similar (just different in scale). I understand that your original intent is to distinguish between the historical events and the natural phenomenon, but I think they need better names. Now it is confusing by just looking at the category names. --minghong


 * No. Look at the article natural disaster to see the difference and meaning of the terms. A hazard is something that presents a threat. A disaster is a historical event that has happened, or is happening. I think the best thing to do is to think of a better name for Category:Natural hazards, rather than merging them. Also, the merger tag you used is for articles, so I am going to remove it. If you want to proceed with different names/merger, please read WP:CFD. Thanks. Carcharoth 19:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose: The terms hazard and disaster are separate and well established in scientific literature. You can see some examples in the literature list at WP:DM.  Most articles currently confuses the two terms.  But that does not mean that we should give up in maintaining the correct use of them.  -- rxnd ( t | &#8364; | c ) 22:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong support : The terms may be well established in scientific literature, but Wikipedia is not a scientific resource - as we have to keep reminding our students at my university. The two terms are indistinguishable to a person arriving in search for an article. I believe the appropriate way to make the point about the distinction you identify would be to place a clear comment to that effect at the start of the combined catgeory page. People who already know the difference will not be searching for it in Wikipedia. Neuralwarp (talk) 10:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose A hazard is a disaster that hasn't happened yet, but that doesn't make it definable as a disaster.  Use of only Natural Disasters as a cat name precludes inclusions of "ones that haven't happened yet but might", while use of only Natural Hazards doesn't do justice to disasters.Skookum1 (talk) 14:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose Per Erikssond and Skookum1. Black Tusk (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)