Talk:1999 Jiji earthquake

Name of article
Hello! I have a photograph that might be appropriate to post on this wikipedia page. I took the photo inside the Taroko Gorge a few days after the quake. It shows a massive bridge tumbled in ruins, with heavy construction equipment clearing away the wreckage. I'm totally wikipedia-ignorant, so I don't know how to post this photo myself, nor do I want to take the time to learn how to do it! But if you'd be interested in looking at the photo, and using it on this wiki page or anywhere else (I have no copyright interests), please let me know and I'd be happy to email it to you. My email: china.teacher@yahoo.com      Regards,  Dan Kuehner  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.7.168.207 (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of the "chi-chi earthquake" in English, only the "921 Earthquake". Is there any evidence for the common English name being "chi-chi" rather than "921"? "chi-chi" sounds like it is a transliteration of the common Chinese name. Readin (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I also think that "921 earthquake" is a more common name. Although most earthquake articles are named in the "YEAR PLACE earthquake" format, I don't think there is a naming policy on that.-- Jerrch 20:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Isn't there a Wiki policy that says we use the common English name for things, presumably including earthquakes? Readin (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, WP:UCN.-- Jerrch 21:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you know how to rename stuff? I don't.Readin (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the move, FOARP. Readin (talk) 17:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 21 May 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved.  QEDK ( T  &#9749;  C ) 16:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

1999 Jiji (Chichi) earthquake → 1999 Jiji earthquake – Chichi is just another romanization of Jiji. If we include all the romanizations we might even have 1999 Jiji (Chichi, Chi-Chi, Chi Chi, Ji-Ji, Ji Ji) earthquake but I don't see the point of doing that. Timmyshin (talk) 20:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. WP:ROMANIZATION.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   02:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Taiwantaffy (talk) 10:55, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:ROMANIZATION. CookieMonster755 📞 ✉ ✓ 22:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 26 January 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move to any particular title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 16:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

1999 Jiji earthquake → 921 earthquake 1999 Taiwan earthquake – Per WP:UCRN, Naming conventions (events) and Trends. Szqecs (talk) 14:01, 26 January 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. —  Za  wl  09:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The earthquake happened in year 1999 AD, not in year 921 AD. See the start of 1999 Jiji earthquake for how the number 921 arose; but using it for the article's name is confusing for people outside Taiwan. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:15, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * According to Trends, '921 earthquake' is far more searched on google, worldwide. Another name is '1999 Taiwan earthquake', which is still far more common than the current name. Szqecs (talk) 03:49, 27 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose use English In ictu oculi (talk) 10:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose too ambiguous + similar popularity as taiwan version support alternative move to 1999 Taiwan earthquake which is more used in sources than the current title + more common search term (despite our article being named jiji earthquake..) Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Here's the thing though...who on earth calls it Jiji earthquake? I've lived in Taiwan for nearly a decade, and I've never heard a single person call it that. I've also lived abroad for longer than that and the few non-Taiwanese I know who know about the earthquake never call it "Jiji earthquake". We can argue until the cows come home over whether the title might make people think "921 earthquake" is too ambiguous of a name, but isn't it far more confusing to give it a name practically no one uses? 223.141.45.27 (talk) 14:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * "921 Earthquake" is most common in Taiwan but that is a calque of its Chinese name—ambiguous to non-initiates and not ideal for a general reference work with worldwide scope. "1999 Taiwan earthquake" is more appropriate but is not sufficiently precise. —  AjaxSmack  14:18, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As I pointed out, either proposed names are far more googled worldwide. Szqecs (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:UE (i.e., not Chinglish) and opppose 1999 Taiwan earthquake as insufficiently precise (nb 1999 Chiayi earthquake). —  AjaxSmack  14:18, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There's something called primary topic and given the impact I think this one qualifies. 1999 Chiayi earthquake doesn't even exist. Szqecs (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose. 921 is an abbreviation, is jargon.  Withdraw the request and start again, it is not OK to change the nomination mid discussion.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 13 August 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus (closed by non-admin page mover) Brad  v  05:10, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

1999 Jiji earthquake → 1999 Taiwan earthquake – WP:UCRN, Naming conventions (events), WP:PRECISION (impacted whole island). Szqecs (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Dekimasu よ! 17:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting.  Brad  v  22:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * What, if anything, has changed since the last discussion? Dekimasu よ! 18:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The last discussion was for '921 earthquake'. Szqecs (talk) 04:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Support as per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISION. Google searches show that sources referring to this event as "Taiwan earthquake" vastly outnumber those referring to it as "Jiji earthquake": 42,000 to 9,000 in Google and 4,000 to 100 in GBooks (and this with quotations; results are much more lopsized if no quotation is used). This couples with "Taiwan" being more precise to unambiguously describe the event's scope and impact. Also of noting is that large earthquakes get typically named after regions (2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, 2012 Indian Ocean earthquakes) or while countries (1906 Ecuador–Colombia earthquake, 2010 Chile earthquake, 2016 Ecuador earthquake) unless a more precise location has a specific notability in English sources (1755 Lisbon earthquake, 1960 Valdivia earthquake), the later of which does not seem to be the case here.  Impru20 talk 13:57, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you look at the content of the hits? Most of the Google Books hits I see that were used in your 4,000-to-100 comparison read something like "1999 ChiChi, Taiwan earthquake" on the first 3-4 pages, and after the 4th page there are no real hits. There are no real hits past the 4th page for the other search either, but that comparison is inconclusive at best. Putting all three search terms in quotes, as "1999 Taiwan earthquake" and "1999 Jiji earthquake", etc., there are about 35 valid hits for "1999 Taiwan earthquake", 12 valid hits for "1999 Jiji earthquake", and 66 valid hits for "1999 Chi Chi earthquake". (By the way, Taiwan is less, not more, precise here.) Dekimasu よ! 17:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * PRECISION just requires for the title to be precise "enough", but no more precise than that, so that is why I brought it as a reasoning for the move. Nonetheless, doing some additional investigation it seems like "1999 Chi-Chi earthquake" could be an even more common term than "1999 Taiwan earthquake" (50,000 in Google searches and 5,000 in GBooks). It is awkward that the Pinyin form of the name is used in this article when it is the least popular of the available options. I think that even if the move to "Taiwan earthquake" did not succeed, WP:NC-CHINA would require "Jiji" to be moved to "Chi-Chi" in the title as the most popular form of the two.  Impru20 talk 21:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would expect the title to be consistent with whatever title we choose for the place currently at Jiji, Nantou. (That is, I'd support "Chichi earthquake" if there were support for moving the article on the location, but not otherwise.) Dekimasu よ! 21:07, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * That would make some sense, but I do not think that there is a strict need for consistency here (i.e. there could be one name for which the place may be more commonly known in English sources as of currently, while an event happening at that place may be more commonly known by that place's COMMONNAME at the time of its happening). Checking the naming convention for Chinese name places generally rules that pinyin be used unless another form is more well-established in current English usage. I have made some investigation and it looks like "Chi-Chi" gives more results than "Jiji": considering searches related to Taiwan, it would give 574,000 results for Chi-Chi and 361,000 for Jiji. However, most (if not all) results found for "Chi-Chi" are related to the earthquake, whereas results for "Jiji" mostly relate to the place. Impru 20  talk 13:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose without further rationale. The proposed title seems insufficiently precise (nb 1999 Chiayi earthquake) and does not follow the pattern of others in Category:Earthquakes in Taiwan (save one).  A number of other earthquakes (e.g. the 1935 Shinchiku-Taichū earthquake) were felt over much of the island, so why this does this one require a vaguer title?  —  AjaxSmack  21:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would think the proposed title is precise enough as per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the name. The Chiayi earthquake does not even have an article in the English wiki and seems unlikely to meet either the usage or the long-term significance for "1999 Taiwan earthquake", whereas this Jiji earthquake meets both. Nonetheless, see my reply above to Dekimasu where I commented that "1999 Chi-Chi earthquake" is an even more popular form of the name than "1999 Taiwan earthquake", but for some reason it is the least common of the three, Jiji earthquake, the one currently in use. Could be proposed as a compromise choice for a move.  Impru20 talk 21:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment The Google book search '1999 "Taiwan earthquake"' above includes many Chi-Chi, Taiwan Earthquake. My brief exploration indicates that '1999 "Chi-Chi earthquake"' may be the most common name.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 21:55, 29 August 2018 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The first picture looks like the quake was no big deal
The first picture, File:Earthquake- road crack.jpg, looks like just some road maintenance. Jidanni (talk) 04:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The image of road repair in Taichung just looks like road repair. Seems like a tighter-cropped image of the Wuchang Temple would be both a better illustration of the damage, and a more iconic image from the disaster. (Many people in Taiwan think of the temple when they think of the 9/21 earthquake; almost no one thinks of this particular stretch of road.) 2401:E180:8820:12AD:6B32:C4D8:890C:94A (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It does look like road maintenance, doesn't it? I've removed it. Dawnseeker2000  15:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)