Talk:2006 Pangandaran earthquake and tsunami/Archive 1


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reference Tags
Please use the expanded reference tags, which have been used for the first 5 - if you don't know how to use them, just copy and paste from other references and fill in the blanks.  K i ll fe s t 2  13:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

7.7 or 7.2?
CNN and other sources say it's 7.2 not 7.7 (which is what the article says). Is this an issue of different scales? Also, one of the references is broken (I don't know what its creator meant to do). BrokenSegue 16:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC) The temblor that spawned Monday’s tsunami was revised upward from magnitude 7.1 to 7.7, the U.S. Geological Survey said late Monday following a review by a seismologist, and was followed by a series of powerful aftershocks. (MSNBC) Looks like the other sources are wrong. BrokenSegue 16:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * In this case the USGS is our best bet. In the future, there's a good third way: simply tell the reader that sources are in dispute as to the exact magnitude of the quake and give both figures (change this according to whatever fact or figure sources are in dispute over). --Oldak Quill 16:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, write "7.2-7.7" in future, till it's known.  K i ll fe s t 2  23:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Death Toll
AP now reports 86 dead; http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/indonesia Njjones 18:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * hello? a resident said he saw a wave comming at 40 kmph... !!--I.aditya 20:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * New Death Toll- The new count is 262 according to AP via Yahoo. You know it's a busy news day when this is barely mentioned on CNN or Fox News here in the states. Njjones 04:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

First reference citation on article (AP) does not go to article
It goes to a generic AP cite for US news. KarenAnn 23:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Citation removed.  K i ll fe s t 2  23:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Warning System- Successful?
Does anyone have any news on whether or not the new Tsunami warning system was successful at all in prediction/relaying the information about this tsunami, and if so, how effective it was? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spliph (talk • contribs)


 * According to Yahoo (which is sourced by Reuters), "Tsunami alerts were issued for parts of Indonesia and Australia, but they did not reach the victims, as there was no early warning system working in the disaster zone, according to an official at the geophysics agency in Jakarta." (3rd paragraph from top).


 * And, according to HindustanTimes.com "Indonesia was the worst hit country by the 2004 tsunami and has installed a warning system across much of Sumatra island, but not on Java, which just seven weeks ago was hit by a powerful quake that killed thousands." (3rd paragraph from top again).  K i ll fe s t 2  03:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The international warning system worked -- national governments were notified. But Indonesia still has no working system to get those warnings to its region administrations, let alone villages. --Dhartung | Talk 09:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrong link in Jakarta Post reference
The Jakarta Post link takes me to a business story titled "Malaysian TV operator Astro plans investment in Indonesian jointc venture". The closest thing I can find on their site is this story, which mentions a four metre high wave but not its speed or the fishermen. -- Avenue 09:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've now found another story which references the first, so I've substituted that one instead. -- Avenue 09:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Middle section...?
Doesn't that middle section belong in the Uncyclopedia?--Bdol 13:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It would be helpful if you could quote the section or at least part of it so we would know what you're talking about. With the current revision, I can see nothing that belongs in Uncyclopedia so either it's been removed or perhaps you're mistaken. Nil Einne 19:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think Bdol meant the section removed in this edit. -- Avenue 01:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Wave height in Ocean and at Shore
Is there any information concerning the wave height and speed? Also, was the wave really only 6 feet high at the shore? --Eraticus 22:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As the tsunami article tells us, tsunami waves aren't usually noticable until they reach shore. With this tsunami, there have been conflicting reports on height by eye-witnesses. Killfest2 (Critique my new user page design please) 05:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

From all Indonesian televison which show the amateure camera in pangandaran beach, tell that the wave height in shore when tsunami happen is about 5 until 6 feet.The Geological departement in Indonesia supported this information also --brucesama 2:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Estimated casualties section
As of 13:29, 21 July 2006, the articles shows a few figures on the deaths, missing...etc. I get confused when I see figures from different sources. Indonesia and newspapers in English provide different figures... how do I understand the figures?--Fitzwilliam 12:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Current event
should the current event template be removed? I think there's nothing to change rapidly now, the death toll is more-or-less stable. Eshcorp 09:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

GA Nomination
Article generally looks good, but I was wondering if the evacuation section couldn't be expanded some. Usually this is a pretty involved process, and there could probably be more details included.--Esprit15d 12:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, fair point. I'll see what I can do.  Daniel . Bryant  10:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with it looks good - but there are more Indonesian based on line sources with english language versions that have not been tapped surely - journos and their runners for foreign news sources may be one source - but surely there are more arts from Jakarta in english that could have been utilised? SatuSuro 14:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Fixed, and GA. Thanks!  Daniel . Bryant  11:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.