Talk:2010 Copiapó mining accident/Archive 2

Section: Search and Rescue Attempts
In the "Ventilation Shaft" part, the last paragraph, can someone please change that reference to the "president of chili" to something more appropriate please? I don't know what is factually correct to put there but I know it is not that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.172.250 (talk) 17:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Your vague allegations or suspicions aren't particularly helpful, dear anonymous-editor-who-doesn't-sign-his-comments. &mdash;QuicksilverT @ 17:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I could find no instance of the spelling "chili" in the entire article. Perhaps it was fixed without comment since your observation but it is not there at this point.  Veriss (talk) 17:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Please do not mind what arrogant Americants say. Their so called "news" are only about death and destruction 24/7. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.28.90 (talk) 19:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, the vast majority of the sources used in this article are from Spanish language, international news services and notable European services and newspapers. Please point out this supposed "American propaganda". Veriss (talk) 20:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Just 1 Q at the moment. Who were the "funny" guy that thought he could heavily edit this talk page and get away with it, an American? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.28.90 (talk) 23:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, Brazil's TV Globo correspondent discussed this issue at length with his anchor. Anybody else? Aldo L (talk) 02:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Rescuers
Are they even relevant to the table? I am deleting it. Thanks.(In 10 years we will look back and we will see how silly it was to put that little table there.)--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 01:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree that the table for the rescuers is unnecessary, but it seems appropriate that their presence should be mentioned within the text somewhere. That is to say, those five (six?) men retain the (dubious) distinction of being the last to inhabit the mine, and in a very literal sense, the operation is not complete until they are safely on the surface. Though, since they've been underground for a matter of only hours rather than weeks, they do not merit the special prominence suggested by a distinct table. Jrmarsico (talk) 01:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Tracking the complete series of events is the kind of thing we will want to have been done in 10 years time.©Geni 01:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Why delete it? The work has already been done to make the table, why are you worried about saving a few bytes of space on the servers?  I originally thought the table was unneeded but it's there now so let's keep it.  Those rescuers displayed some serious cajones going in there, they deserve their names to be on the table.  We'll figure out shortly whether it was five or six left and the name of the unknown one if there he exists.  Veriss (talk) 01:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no harm keeping it, and the mission is not over until the rescuers are also out. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 02:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. These are special people. Recording their contribution for prosperity is important. Gstein (talk) 01:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * For "prosperity" read "posterity"? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:44, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Please review the table. It appears that Manuel González (the first rescuer) will be the last to be removed from the mine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.42.105.21 (talk) 02:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC) http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidente_en_el_yacimiento_San_José_de_2010 mentions a "Pedro Rivero" as the last rescuer to reach the mine, rather that Cristián Bugueño (mentioned at http://www.eluniversal.com/2010/10/12/int_ava_designan-a-rescatisi_12A4595053.shtml). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.42.105.21 (talk) 02:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Please keep the table. Those rescue workers deserve recognition for potentially risking their lives and actually going down there. Imagine if the mine had collapsed then and there. We would have SIX (yes, six, not five) extra casualties. Their names must be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.138.9 (talk) 20:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Media attention
Now when it's over with a happy ending. I think it should be a section about media coverage or media attention of worldwide media, social media and public opinion. I read somewhere that at least 1 billion of people watching this event and 2 thousand journalist acredited in the mine. And appear to be the event most covered of recent years.

what do you think guys? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.100.119.27 (talk) 02:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed entirely. This was a media event of enormous magnitude by any standard, and such a fact should be noted with at least a cursory mention. (Incidentally, I'd be interested to learn more about the presence and activity of the North Korean media delegation, whom I heard was present at the scene; but I wonder how relevant, let alone encyclopedic, such a fact would be.) Jrmarsico (talk) 02:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I worked half my life in broadcast and switch to the live feed scene of the capsule first entering the mine was simply the most incredible piece of footage I have ever seen in my life. I was in studio for the live feed of "tank Man at Tienanmen, and also handled feeds of tapes of footage from the Thailand Tsunami first hitting the beach, as well as lots of "bang bang" from war reporting, but this rescue coverage in both content and breadth is singularly unique in so many ways. The confluence of technology with feeds from the trapped miners, the probable TV and internet live feed audience numbers, down to the the President of Chile (well a press aide for sure) tweeting, make this event media impact worthy of its own article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.51.134 (talk) 19:08, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. What about the mysterious last person in the mine? 'Unknown'. Go, go, go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.64.113.27 (talk) 02:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't hardly wait for the article Conspiracy theories of the 2010_Copiapó_mining_accident and Criticism of the 2010_Copiapó_mining_accident!--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The second one might actually be a perfectly good article... Bouchecl (talk) 03:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * North Korean "media" delegation? No wonder, as an American "geological" delegation opened the rescue shaft. Remember dual-use technology? Aldo L (talk) 15:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That's exactly what I'm curious about. I'd be surprised if the North Koreans were there simply to conduct journalism. Certainly we can assume that, if their countrymen back in NK did get news coverage of the event, there was a bit of a partisan slant (to the effect, I would imagine, of "Look how Glorious Leader has single-handedly delivered these poor Chileans from their captivity!") Jrmarsico (talk) 20:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL Aldo L (talk) 05:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Times for the rescuers
I have translated this table from es:Accidente en el yacimiento San José de 2010 in the Spanish Wikipedia:

Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I stated before that the Spanish Wikipedia editors probably have ready access to more detailed sources about the rescue team's activities and that we should follow their lead. I support pasting this information in but we will need help with references if the existing ones don't cover it.  Thanks Veriss (talk) 02:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The Spanish Wikipedia, just before this table, has a line of text "Las horas de rescate son correctas, pero puede que no pertenezcan a los nombres indicados, excepto los que se indican como confirmado" = "Rescue times are correct, but may not belong to the names listed, except those listed as confirmed". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

33 number
AFP wrote a report about the seemingly lucky number 33 in the incident. In Chile mine accident, 33 is lucky number. This might warrant mention in a sentence or two. A NG C HENRUI WP:MSE♨ 13:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Only interesting if you are superstitious. Hmmm, time to clean my lucky coffee cup.  :)  Veriss (talk) 17:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Certainly adds to the power of the symbolism of these events though. There's a Russian folktale (alluded to by Solzhenitsyn in The Oak and the Calf) about the thirty-three heroes who were submerged by the sea but returned ~(after being magically kept alive?) to the surface and were victorious. That kind of thing comes into play in the way people respond to the miners' story: there's an obvious resurrection symbolism to it.Strausszek (talk) 11:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we should concentrate more on the FACT that they were down there 69 days?! Nothing superstitious about number 69 i can tell you that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.22.134 (talk) 12:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Donated Oakley sunglasses
Can someone please permanently remove the crass commercial exploitation of the miners situation by some marketer from Oakley?

If you try to remove this it immediately undone.

thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.70.22.220 (talk) 18:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's more a case of sunglasses fans, specifically fashion conscious American Oakley fans, replacing it. I really don't think the edits are "crass commercial exploitation".  To be sure, it was a very clever product placement move by Oakley that was picked up and carried by most English media sources so I expect that these fans are going to continue to keep putting it back in as it is both a verifiable true fact and very well sourced across multiple prominent sources.  I don't think it's worth taking a stand one way or the other and after a few days there will be less pedestrian editing and it will eventually disappear.  Veriss (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think another good, and perhaps more neutral, reason to remove it is that there were supplies donated by many different companies which are not listed. I'm sure references could be found for some of those, but adding them all into the article would just read like an annoying sponsored piece, thus not listing any of them unless there's a really good reason to do so, which I don't see being the case with Oakley. (E.g., how come nobody's hunted down a manufacturer for those rescue "tracksuits" yet? Answer: Probably because it's likely not a "famous" company like Oakley with pop-culture value.) Agree with the poster above, leave it be for now until edits quiet down, at which point we can just reference "sunglasses." Anyone who has a GOOD reason to keep the "Oakley" text in the article is of course free to rebut here. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know that there is "a GOOD reason to keep the "Oakley" text in the article", or at least THIS article, but I would suggest that somebody looking to research "the crass commercial exploitation" of natural disasters and other events that draw global media attention may find an article listing such exploitation useful.
 * It is not just the commercial interests who attempt to use such events as promotion, there are also political interests and the promotion of nationalism. Chile seems to be great for this, the Chilean flag was plastered around this event more than the Stars & Stripes in an American Legion on Independence Day. Kid Bugs (talk) 02:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Chile is a relatively small country and was proud of pulling off something so enormous and complex without complications plus eager to shed what they felt was a lingering world image of Pinochet and coup d'état. National pride is normal and to be expected.  One day a major English site in China only ran an article about the two Chinese made cranes at the site, no mention of the imminent break through.  Australian, Canadian and South African media all ran extensive coverage of their nation's contributions just as US media did the same with NASA's involvement.  The Canadian Globe and Mail ran long articles explaining to their readers how the US Plan B had a head start over Plan A and C which had heavy Canadian participation.  Editors all made sure their nation's congratulations was listed in the "Reaction" section.  The Chileans were very savvy in ensuring they put their best face on while under the media's glare.


 * I was actually surprised that no one tried to start a section listing all the contributions of the reportedly 30 to 40 nations who lent their expertise throughout the operation. If there was such a listing, Oakley would deserve mention but I don't think it should be mentioned in the text of the article.  Please don't start such a listing, the article is pretty long already.  Veriss (talk) 02:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Was the capsule spinning?
It was reported in some media that the capsule would be spinning during the ascent. No such spinning is visible, however, in the videos of the borehole as the capsule comes up the hole. Spinning of the capsule appears impossible given that the wheels are aligned vertically. This was maybe a kind of an urban legend. Andreas (T) 19:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it started as a concern by experts that spinning could happen and complicate the rescue and disorient the passengers. It was addressed during several press conferences that the design of the capsule with it's spring loaded wheels were meant to reduce spinning and that the actual winch and cable system to be used was specifically designed to minimize spinning as well.  It appears that the plans adequately mitigated that concern and since the speculation was so heavily covered, it should be addressed somehow in the article if appropriate sources can be dug up.  Veriss (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * "Dug up"? Good one. :) Seems to me they said during the coverage that there was some small degree of spinning but that the efforts you describe kept that to a minimum. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * During a press conference on 13 October 2010, Chilean Minister of Health confirmed that there was "almost no spinning" and that that was good because it abated the risk of disorientation side-effects. http://america.infobae.com/notas/11542-La-Fnix-se-est-comportando-extraordinariamente-bien Aldo L (talk) 01:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As I understood it, it was not so much a question of the capsule "spinning" like a cork on a string, but the fact that the tunnel wasn't perfectly straight and had "corkscrew"-like twists in it. In either case, it didn't prove to be a practical problem. Physchim62 (talk) 02:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

pinera's speech
doeas anybody have a link to the rtext of pinera's post rescue speech? spanish or english —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.174.64 (talk) 20:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't the full text, but it has substantial extracts (and it's official). Piñera seemed to be ad-libbing quite a lot in his various speeches, so there probably isn't a "text" as such (unless someone could be bothered to transcribe it all) As an irrelevant aside, one of the British media (can't remember which one) described him as "coming from the Fidel Castro school of public speaking", meaning he was using lots of words to say not very much. Physchim62 (talk) 03:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Satellite image caption
The caption under the satellite image may be considered incorrect, or misleading. The mine can barely be seen even in full resolution above the center of the frame. People who are not alert may mistake Copiapó for the mine.Mirrordor 01:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirrordor (talk • contribs)

Veriss (talk) 03:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I replaced it with an annotated image to make it even easier!


 * By the way, all of our images of the actual rescue have been nominated for deletion over copyright issues. Apparently the Chilean Government won't release the pictures into the public domain so Wikipedia does not have the right to use them so we will need to find replacements for them very soon.  Veriss (talk) 04:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There's a very good NASA image referenced above if someone feels like taking the effort to crop/scale/etc it to replace the current overhead of the mine. As far as the Chilean government's pictures, well, there ARE the CC-licensed flickr ones which are also to be used for "editorial" purposes (which I interpret from the translation to be "journalistic" purposes in general.) Perhaps someone can look into that further; technically the Chilean government did release the images under a compatible license just by uploading them as far as I can tell, but their comments on what they're for seems to allow proper good-faith use as well... 71.57.48.148 (talk) 14:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Procedure
The post-emergence steps are not quite right. At the moment of surfacing, a doctor approached the cage to check for the miner's alertness. Then, the miner was helped out of the cage, was immediately reunited with a maximum of 3 next-of-kins and received a protocolary salute. After this, he was laid in a stretcher and entered into a field hospital for a triage. After successfully passing the triage, he was transferred by ambulance to an office building, still on the mine premises, for a private time with his next-of-kins. Finally, the miners were transferred in groups of 4, via helicopter, to Copiapó Hospital for a 24-48 hour period of medical observation. Later on the rescue day it was possible to appreciate that when the capsule was seconds from emergence a worker on the surface yelled down the pipe to the upcoming miner: "[Name], how are you doing?!", and the miner's response came back, usually: "I'm fine!". Then the rescue workers stepped back to give room and finally the capsule erupted to the surface. Aldo L (talk) 02:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks good. I suggest you go ahead and paste this into the article where you think it needs to be.  Veriss (talk) 05:39, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Auto-collapsing wiki table attempt
The article was becoming pretty long and in danger of pruning by the ever eager byte counters roaming at large on Wikipedia. I made the two tables auto-collapsing but in my opinion they could be more attractive. My first attempt at wiki tables so will welcome adult supervision there to make them a bit better looking. Veriss (talk) 03:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi..I understand about the auto-collapse, for worry about the article looking and getting too long.  I guess at this point, that can go either way.   I can see it though being unhidden also, as not everyone perusing the article may think to click it.  Depending.  It can go either way, probably. (I've seen way longer articles...lol).   As far as seeking help with WP tables, well I've dealt with a couple of them, months ago, but I'm no expert at all.   I suggest (if you have not done so already), to get some tips, instructions, codes, examples, or ideas on various tables, by clicking and going to Help:Table, and seeing what they have, the various codes for various columns and tables, and seeing on that page the examples of what they look like. ResearchRave (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Russia closes 3 mines, add to reaction section?
In Rostov Southern Russia 3 mines have been closed, should we add this to the reaction section?

http://www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/14792/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.22.134 (talk) 06:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The source doesn't tie it into the Chilean mining accident so my impression is no, don't add it. Veriss (talk) 06:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That would probably be good to add to the other article, if you can maybe find a tie-in and better sources, the other article that's been recently created and worked on, "Response to the 2010 Copiapó mining accident". Put that Russian reaction there, maybe, if a clearer connection can be made to the Chile accident.  I think it would be more fitting and more specific to that other (though related) article. ResearchRave (talk) 07:05, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Here is link 2:

http://www.watoday.com.au/breaking-news-world/russian-bloggers-bitter-at-chile-rescue-20101015-16m3u.html

As i see it, link 1 and 2 ties it together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.150.22.134 (talk) 07:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Link 2 is directly related, link 1 would be too far of a stretch. The info about link 2 could be interesting in the reactions section.  Veriss (talk) 00:00, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The toilet/bathroom situation
At least they managed to survive on food & water anyhow, thankfully.

Now were there toilet facilities where they were trapped? If not, how did they use the restroom and finish up thereafter? Also, did they have any way to shower or clean themselves?

This would be vital to add to the article so that's why I asked. Thank you. --70.179.178.5 (talk) 06:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Possibly, this has been omitted deliberately, out of politenesss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.148.28.137 (talk) 10:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * mmm, like where do you sh-t in a wrecked spaceship? ;>

Well, yes. And although we don't need too much detail the 2km of tunnels they had to wander around in were probably quite useful. It also occurs to me that as they do mining shifts down there anyway there are probably limited facilities available, but a supply of fresh disinfectant was one of the things put down the supply tubes quite early on. Britmax (talk) 11:26, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Some sort of toilet facility was necessary in the normal operation of the mine, not just when they were trapped. Apparently, it used groundwater for the "flush". I saw one report that said the rescuers piped down warm water for showers (no doubt only occasionally). Physchim62 (talk) 15:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Rescue plans: "so-called" Fénix vessels
Why is the Fénix vessel "so-called" in the Rescue plans section? I understand it is based on a previous design, yet I cannot I understand the use of the phrase, "so-called". 71.234.215.133 (talk) 14:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I replaced "so-called" with "dubbed" which is more appropriate. Thanks for calling attention to it.  Veriss (talk) 15:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 16:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

New info coming to light from miners on how they acted underground
Important new details and information being made known by the miners themselves, about things like "burning tires to keep warm", "pushing and shoving and frustration at first", then "calming down and organizing", and different details. Just keep a listen and look-out to new information and before-unknown nuances of just what went on down there during those 10 weeks. ResearchRave (talk) 22:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Some factual checks to-do
Encased top shaft -- either 54 or 56 metres, capsule OD -- either 54 or 55cm, shaft length -- either 622 or 624 metres.

As well, in spite of many claims about escape hatch, it seems that in fact the entire bottom half of the capsule can be separated (and winched down separately from the top) in case the capsule gets stuck. Egh0st (talk) 23:30, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps interested editors can look for detailed articles discussing the design of the capsule in more technical publications or engineering journals. Veriss (talk) 00:18, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed, besides the media is typically rather bad at exact numbers anyway. As well, I would suggest adding RIG-421 vs RIG-422. 87.194.188.201 (talk) 10:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The website of the company involved, Precision Drilling Corporation states that it was a "RIG-421". - 220.101 talk\Contribs 16:33, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Drilling Technology Errors
Clearly, there is mis-information here about the drilling technology used to rescue these minors. First, the "hammer drill" referenced in the main article has virtually no similarity with the DTH (Down The Hole) hammer drills actually used. There is a vast array of websites explaining DTH technology, otherwise known in mining and drilling as "percussion hammers". A percussion hammer employs a large piston that cycles up-and-down in a sleeve with air-port-valving at the top and bottom of the stroke. At the top of the stroke, the piston is cushioned by the compressed air as to not impact the hammer housing. At the same time, the air pressure is directed by the valving to accelerate the piston downward where it impacts the anvil of the drill bit, translating its kinetic energy into an impact transferred through the anvil, shaft and matrix of the bit to the carbide buttons embedded in the face of the drill bit to the rock. These multiple impacts spall off pieces of rock (and dust) which the exhausted air carries back to the surface, either with "straight" or "reverse" circulation. After the piston impacts the anvil, the ported-valving sends the piston upward to start another cycle. Percussion hammers typcially operate at 1000-1100 impacts per minute and sound much like a air-jack hammer (that employs the same piston/anvil concept). In this case, the rescue, pilot holes were all drilled with percussion hammers from surface located drilling equipment. Once the "Plan B" pilot hole was drilled, a special hole-opening, LP, multiple-hammer bit, from Center Rock, Inc., was employed to enlarge the hole from the surface to the completed depth. There is no question that some rock debris fell down the pilot hole while it was being enlarged. We'll have to wait for interviews from the miners to get a feel for how much debris they had to clear away. It will also be interesting to learn from the miners what sound and pressure-impact waves they felt while in the mine. Drilling with percussion tools, well, makes a lot of noise and uses high pressure air. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.160.61 (talk) 05:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd assume miners are used to, and equipped for, working in extremely noisy environments. I also saw an article about using 12 pounds of dynamite to enlarge part of the opening (and maybe to clear out some of the rubble from drilling). One of the miners, Dario Segovia, job function was drilling holes for dynamite and so the blasting was likely done with locally available material. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 07:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Is it safe to assume the Plan B was an unmanned drill lowered into the shaft by a winch? Some people have told me that the American who operated the drill was the first to meet the miners, but this would be impossible if the drill was unmanned.24.92.138.9 (talk) 23:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Text on rescue shaft lid

 * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11539784 shows the President putting an engraved lid on the rescue shaft after all the men were out. Has anyone got a full copy of the engraved text? What I can read on the video at this link including by stop-go'ing through it is "RETIRE LA TAPA SIN / ..ES HABER PENSADO EN LA / ..-ACION Y PLANIFICACION / ..... ABAJO / .... REALIZAR"; / means newline and dots mean lacuna (manuscripts). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My guess: "NO RETIRE LA TAPA SIN / ANTES HABER PENSADO EN LA / FUNCIÓN [or PREPARACIÓN] Y PLANIFICACIÓN/ DEL TRABAJO/ A REALIZAR" i.e, "DO NOT REMOVE THE LID WITHOUT HAVING THOUGHT BEFOREHAND ABOUT THE PURPOSE [or PREPARATION] AND PLANNING OF THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED". The lid looks rusty, so I think it is an off-the-shelf piece of hardware with a standard trade warning written on it. Aldo L (talk) 17:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This image shows the "NO" on the first line. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't it be better if they actually engraved a lid that would have some significance to the rescue or accident?24.92.138.9 (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Religious significance section
I attempted to remove this section per WP:UNDUE and WP:COATRACK; it's basically an organized summary of miscellaneous bits of trivia. If any of the material is worth using, it should be integrated into the rest of the article. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * This section about the religious significance has been added and removed twice now. Due to it's geographical location, the Roman Catholic beliefs and traditions figured prominently throughout the incident and probably rates it's own section.


 * However, the original submission is bloated with extraneous facts and reads like an attempt to proselytize via the article. If it is to remain then it needs serious pruning to at most one or possible two short paragraphs.


 * The parts about the lead driller studying for his license to preach is a good example what needs to be removed in my opinion. P/S: I was raised a Catholic so am somewhat empathetic but it appears to be over promotional in it's current form.  Veriss (talk) 22:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * (I believe the poster below me is using the term "You" as a general expression and that it is not directed at me personally since I never deleted or blanked any sections) Veriss (talk) 01:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The section is not overweigh in light of the heavy coverage of the subject. Plus, if a section is overweight then you edit it down (although not warranted here). You don't just blank the entire section. Mamalujo (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The last paragraph of the section was definitely WP:Coatrack and I removed it. The remaining paragraphs need more pruning.  A member of the brigade sized rescue operation, someone not even part of the 33+6, becoming a deacon in their local parish is frankly, not all that notable.  It certainly does not deserve it's own paragraph.


 * You put a lot of work into it but it's too much. Veriss (talk) 22:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

hello. Thanks for writing me on my Talk page. And inviting me to the discussion. And for your attention to this. And yes, I did notice this matter being brought out in this talk page. I thought that maybe it would resolve itself, get tweaked, with trimming, and more NPOV perhaps. I think the section is probably valid, as there was definitely a significance or connection with religion and faith and spirituality. Ala, one of the trapped miners himself being religious or a spiritual leader figure, and also one miner said that he never prayed before in his life, but he learned and got into heavy praying during those weeks in that deep mine, and also the religious paraphernalia. etc....

The IP "96" summarily removed the whole thing, with no explanation. Which arguably violates WP:VANDTYPES. Hence why I undid it. It was vandalism and wholesale blanking, with no summary or rationale, also in violation of WP:NOBLANKING, as that IP never discussed it on Talk, and did not even put an edit comment (against edit summary disputes), and the section has some merit, and is well-sourced and well-covered. Though it could use some re-working. Thanks again. ResearchRave (talk) 01:33, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As someone from the outside coming in to read this article, this section feels entirely out of place and unnecessary. It seems as though it has no connection to the mine, the accident or the rescue, it's just a comment on the personal beliefs of the miners. If this is noteworthy, then shouldn't the idea that they requested certain food items be noted too? What side of the bed did they sleep on? Did it change in the mine? After? It seems to have no good connection to the article as a whole. Apolloae (talk) 01:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, the section is relevant to the article, as it demonstrates how the accident impacted the miners spiritually. Ricardo Santiago (talk) 01:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps since it is tacked on at the end it appears as an afterthought. I'll try moving it under the Miner's Health section and see if it fits better there.  Veriss (talk) 03:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I renamed the section to "Roman Catholic traditions" thinking the other section name was much too generic and this name may better reflect the actual topic discussed in that section. "Roman Catholic faith and influence" or something along those lines may be a better fit. I'm sure someone can wordsmith the title a bit better then I can. The section still needs work but I think by moving it to a more logical location and renaming it we have a workable middle ground for both sides of the issue to work on it together. Veriss (talk) 07:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I changed the name of the section title.....to "Religious activities of trapped miners."  I thought this would make it a bit clearer, and more specific....I hope this sounds ok...I think it does.  I welcome thoughts. ResearchRave (talk) 10:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this warrants its own section. There are bits that are just excessively verbose compared to the rest of the article; it's not quite encyclopedic to describe the step-by-step religious related-only actions of an individual miner. How about this turns into an "Activities of trapped miners" section or something of the sort? I think it is important to note the religious views as it was part of their daily activities, and Chile is a fairly religious country; however, I think those should be noted alongside their other daily activities which have also been well documented in the media. The current section just seems out of place and overblown with detail. Certain things such as the Chilean president asking for church bells to be rung are definitely noteworthy in my opinion; a list of what religious items were sent down is not. I'm sure they requested plenty of non-religious items that are not listed. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 14:26, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello. There is also a bit in the health section which is about T-shirts with religious messages on them. Could somebody move it to the right section, please. MissWizzy (talk) 14:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I moved it to the religious section. It was really in a bad location due to chronology problems and the religious section seemed like most appropriate place for it.


 * For the time being, I'm going to rename that section to "Roman Catholic faith and influence" since half the section is about the families, rescuers, the president and the larger community. Even from a purely academic point of view, their faith had an important role so needs to be discussed at some point.  I think even this name may still need wordsmithing.  That section still needs some work but I'm sure this newer location it will attract interested editors to improve it.  Veriss (talk) 16:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Naming it "Roman Catholic..." would be a misnomer and misleading. A few of the miners were protestant evangelicals and a number of the family members were Adventists and there was some notable news coverage involving them and an Adventist minister who was at Camp Hope. No doubt the news relating to the religious aspects of the incident are predominantly Catholic, but not exclusively so. Mamalujo (talk) 18:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That's a good point. I was just searching for a name that would help keep the scope of the material in that section on topic and reduce the friction that annoyed editors earlier.  One minor issue with the current name though is that a good bit of the section deals with events involving people other then the miners.  Veriss (talk) 23:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

How about simply "Religious faith" as a section header? I agree that there needs to be some mention of religion in the article, and also that it's incorrect to lump all of that religion under Roman Catholicism. Physchim62 (talk) 00:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I already did change the name of the section title.....to "Religious activities of trapped miners."    And for a while now it seems to be accepted.  I chose that wording because it's clear enough, and also deals with the trapped miners' ACTIONS, in a religious way, while they were underground.   In a certain way, it's a bit clearer, I think, than "Roman Catholic beliefs and traditions", at least in a sense.   Because the new title deals more precisely with actions of the miners themselves in the trapped mine, and not before being trapped. ResearchRave (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The "Health of the miners" section also contains a ton of religion-related material now. E.g., '"We 33 miners are walking hand in hand with God," said miner Mario Sepúlveda. Early on, the men said they set aside time to pray daily.' and 'The miners' strong faith-based values guided them through the ordeal. "There are actually 34 of us, because God has never left us down here," 19-year-old miner Jimmy Sánchez wrote in a letter.' I do not believe this belongs in the "Health of the miners" section and plan to condense it into the current "Religious activities" section (which itself I think definitely needs some condensation as I've noted above, and likely merging into a section on activities of the miners in general.) Obviously their faith and that of Chile is noteworthy, but references to such should not be spread out so much across multiple parts of the article. Definitely not to the health section which should be limited to scientific facts regarding their health. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 14:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Timetable

 * I translated this timetable from fi:Chilen_kaivosonnettomuus 2010 in the Finnish Wikipedia. Google's translater with some manual tidying, and the alien intricacies of Finnish grammar. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * One of the delights of Google-translated Finnish was the word 'Nasalta', which is NASA with the Finnish ablative case ending stuck on. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC))


 * 5 August. - In the Atacama desert in northern Chile the San Jose copper and gold mine's shaft collapsed. In the first five days, 33 men have 16 square meters of protection area. They do not see anything because of the stone dust, even in the light of their miners' lamps.
 * 10 August. - They can go outside after five days when the dust has settled safely. They are trying to leave the mine through ventilation shaft, but they lacked the required ladder, and later also the tunnels suffered damage.
 * 22 August. - Men in the mine can be contacted when they get a drill bit attached to the message, which says that they all are alive.
 * 23 August. - Rescue tunneling is expected to last until Christmas.
 * 25 August. - Chile's government is asking for help from Nasa for the rescue mission.
 * 26 August. - Chile is to freeze the $ 1,800,000 which mine company's assets owns. The money is to be used for compensation to be paid out to mine survivors and the trapped miners.
 * 27 August. - The miners send video greetings to their homes.
 * 28 August. - The authorities indicate that five miners were suffering from depression.
 * 30 August. - A speck of hope wakens that could save the lives of miners already by mid-October.
 * 31 August. - Three separate rescue hole drilling begins.
 * 1 September. - NASA experts advise the Chilean authorities to honesty. Miners must not pass time in vain hope.
 * 4 September. - NASA begins to build a special cage for lifting.
 * 12 September. - The miners are given permission to smoke.
 * 15 September. - Ariel Ticona Yáñes's wife gives birth to a daughter. Babies born in Chile are a big media event.
 * 17 September. - An emergency tunnel pilot hole may be drilled.
 * 21 September. - The miners will be taken to arrange media training for public challenges.
 * 26 September. - A rescue capsule arrives at the mine.
 * 30 September. - Miners' relatives demand the government and the mining company failed to redress. 29 families are to raise a total of 12 million dollar claim for compensation.
 * 1 October. - The Mining Minister declares that the miners could be rescued in mid-October, weeks, more probably than was thought earlier.
 * 4 October. - Progress of a rescue tunnel drilling slows down when it come to hard rock.
 * 9 October. - Drill "B" completed a safety route.
 * 13 October. - The mine workers will be taken to safety one at a time.
 * 14 October. - All 33 miners were taken up out of the mine.

This is certainly appropriate but in my opinion should be added in an auto-collapsing wiki table. Info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Collapsing Veriss (talk) 15:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Images of the Fenix-2 capsule?

 * How can good images with suitable copyright be got of the Fenix-2 capsule? What does Chile law, and the mine company's rules, say about the many photographs of these events that likely were taken on site by private individuals such as miners' relatives? A television commentator remark "flash bulbs everywhere" shows that many photographs were taken. Will the Fenix-2 go in a museum, and when? Will it be photographable there? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There were pictures of the Fenix 2 capsule (Chilean Government uploaded them as CC-BY to Flickr, we imported some of them to Commons but it was clarified later that they weren't for commercial use) but the government website is copyrighted. Perhaps someone could draw Fénix? Diego Grez (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If they are on the Chilean Government's website, please what is their web addresses? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Mining Ministry ; Government. Also, next time don't remove my signature from my comments. Diego Grez (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Regrettably, search of those 2 web sites shows no images of the Fenix-2. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Diego Grez put a huge effort on The Commons and Flickr into attempting to resolve copyright issues so we can use the Chilean government images but in the end they did not cooperate. He was successful however in getting the author of the main image to change his copyright for our project.  We will lose even more images as the nomination for deletion process completes so we need to find or construct suitable images or drawings to have adequate illustration in the article.  Thank you for the strong attempt Diego Grez.  Veriss (talk) 15:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I would have liked to assist the final step of the rescue efforts; I would have taken lots of pictures for Wikinews and obviously for Wikipedia, too. Unfortunately, I didn't have the money and time to travel +1,000 kilometers from Pichilemu to Copiapó. But I did write an article for Wikinews, which you can see here (n:Copiapó, Chile mining accident: in depth). It might be useful to you to add more information to the WP article. Cheers, --Diego Grez (talk) 17:10, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think any images obtained from Google are fair game. I also think we need some pictures of the hole with a worker standing next to it so readers can get a perspective of just how narrow it really is. 24.92.138.9 (talk) 23:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Not true. Please see WP:IUP, Image Use Policy, before Googling for pics since most of them have not been made free to use.

Interesting article with analysis of the new government's handling of the operation
I found this article tonight on the (center-right?) Canadian 'Globe and Mail'. They have published some very in-depth articles about the situation throughout the operation.

It primarily anaylises the response of the Mining Minister and President and the type of planning that went into the operation.

Chile’s CEO moment; http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/americas/chiles-ceo-moment/article1759796/page1

I would like to incorporate parts of it into our article but am not sure yet how much use and exactly where it should go. Enjoy the article and I welcome your suggestions. Veriss (talk) 04:42, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Sepúlveda Question
Is the miner Mario Sepúlveda in any way related to the rescue worker Patricio Sepúlveda?24.92.138.9 (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Almost certainly not. Sepúlveda is a fairly common surname in Chile. There was an anecdote quoted (I think) in El País that a relative of one of the trapped miners had volunteered to be a rescuer without revealing the relation, but had been found out and excluded from the rescue team. I've no idea if the anecdote is true or not, and I'm not going to go searching for the source, but it does seem very reasonable that the authorities would not have sent down miners' relatives in the rescue operation when they had plenty of unrelated rescuers available. Physchim62 (talk) 23:20, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * So it's basically like the surname, "Smith" in the US?23:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)24.92.138.9 (talk)


 * Yes, or Gonzalez in the US. :-)  Veriss (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Which capsule?
"The capsule ... is called Fénix" - TV pictures show it's labelled "Fénix 2", has this capsule been used throughout? TacoJim (talk) 14:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, they have been using the Fénix 2 throughout, though I can't provide you with any references.195.171.2.22 (talk) 14:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Fénix 1 is the capsule that was revealed to the public originally and into which some family members and members of the press were allowed to climb. Fénix 2 and Fénix 3 allegedly have some minor improvements over Fénix 1, so that's why they started the rescue with Fénix 2.  Fénix 3 and Fénix 1 are available for parts or substitution if there should be a failure of Fénix 2. &mdash;QuicksilverT @ 17:26, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It would be nice if someone made a section on the pods themselves. I think if anything the rescue vehicle deserves more credit. E.g. BBC news website has some good references on that http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11527129. This section would be pretty dull though unless someone adds images like the actual capsule photos and an illustrative model of the vehicle (like on BBC). Egh0st (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I do agree that the capsule deserves a lot of credit. As I am watching the twenty-eighth rescue, that capsule really looks all scratched and beat up. It's probably going to wind up in a museum somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.138.9 (talk) 22:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * For sure about a museum. It would be nice if someone who is able to keeps track of this over the next few months.  Ideally, two of the capsules should go to a museum - #2 for display, and #1 or #3 for people to actually be able to step into and see if they'd fit (and hinge it in case some doof gets stuck!). GBC (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Did Fénix 2 not have a hinge? 24.92.138.9 (talk) 12:29, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

New Camp Hope and families section
I added a new section about Camp Hope and the families. There was tons of reporting on it earlier but now the sources seem kind of thin. Perhaps it was all video reporting. Please feel free to beef up the sources or tweak the section. Veriss (talk) 07:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Added a comments column to the list of miners
I mostly copied them from The Telegraph (London) profile cited in the source. We really should come to a consensus on Gomez's age. Isn't there an official list from the Chilean government we can reference instead of all these conflicting media sources? Some of The Telegraph's comments are kind of lame in my opinion - please free to cure the lameness as you see fit. Veriss (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I found the official list and clarified the disclaimer notice with citations and references. Veriss (talk) 22:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

90 cm waistline seems too little
The diameter of the rescue borehole is 66 cm (26 inches), meaning each miner has to have a waistline of no more than 90 cm (35 inches) to escape.[16] In order to ensure they are the correct size an exercise regimen was developed to keep them in shape.[40] The men are being extracted in a steel rescue capsule 54 cm in diameter (21 inches).

If the diameter of the tube is 54 cm, a simple math calculation leads to a circumference of about 170 cm, not 90. Also, the average waistline for men is about 101 cm, so designing the tube to be 90 cm seems a bit optimistic. Does anyone have any actual numbers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.222.10 (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Consider their arms need to move freely, there are compressed air tanks near their legs, plus the bulk of clothing, sweater and rescue harness all adds to the calculations. Also, the escape hatch at the bottom of the capsule is most likely smaller then the distance between the cage walls.  Multiple factors that the source does not address are most likely driving those measurements.  Veriss (talk) 22:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In that case, the word "meaning" is misleading, as it suggests that the one fact logically follows from the other. If there are other factors which are known to come into play, they ought to be stated, otherwise we will for ever have people (perfectly reasonably) pointing out that 54π is a great deal more than 90. Vilĉjo (talk) 23:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Also keep in mind that humans are not cylindrical. :) There's more adjustment to be due to that and from other bits already noted. Chances are that their hip width is just as important now. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 23:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I doubt we'll find an accurate description of the factors driving the maximum waistline in the mainstream media. I think we are witnessing another situation of non-technical journalists interpreting and homogenizing data into easily digestible bits of information for the general public.  Perhaps interested editors can look for more detailed articles discussing the design of the capsule in more technical publications or engineering journals.  Veriss (talk) 00:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Humans are not cylindrical in shape. Pristino (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops, an anonymous user beat me to it :) Pristino (talk) 10:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Mario Gómez age
We have three references for his age, they give 59, 62 and 64. Yet, somehow the article says in two places he is 63! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/work-matters/201009/boss-luis-urzua-and-the-trapped-miners-in-chile says 62
 * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11170852 says 64
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mario_Gomez_being_rescued_from_the_San_Jos%C3%A9_mine.jpg says 59
 * Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The Guardian lists him as 63. I say we go with whichever age the majority of articles agree on. Until we know for sure. --Welshsocialist (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2010/aug/23/chile-san-jose-mine-trapped-miners

Sky News also lists him as 63 years old. Very confusing the various aged. Maybe somekind of footnote might help with the age issues for the time being, to list the various ages that are sourced. --Welshsocialist (talk) 00:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * http://news.sky.com/skynews/Interactive-Graphics/chileminers


 * I imagine he's 64 and had a birthday recently. The oldest miner, 64-year-old Mario Gomez Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The live Chilean media coverage said he was 63 years old when he was rescued. 24.92.138.9 (talk) 01:46, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I found this page, saying that Gomez is getting married on November 7, which will be his 64th birthday. Maybe it's not a logical reaction, but when a reasonably reliable publication actually tells us the date of his 64th birthday, it comes across as more convincing than when such a publication just mentions that he's 63 or 64 or 61. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 14:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Rescuer extraction times
The first time listed for rescuer extraction are wrong. The first rescuer came out at 22:30 chilean local time. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Do you have a source?--81.106.147.132 (talk) 02:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I was watching BBC's live feed at the time, and they displayed Chile Local Time at the top in a banner. Obviously some other Wikipedian thinks the time was 22:18 when the first rescuer came out; I'm hoping some other viewer can help provide evidence supporting one or the other of our times, so we don't just keep reverting it back and forth. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 02:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * the minute-to-minute text feed at http://www.emol.com/noticias/nacional/detalle/detallenoticias.asp?idnoticia=441043 has stopped. The only other source I can find is the BBC Live feed text.  Do we want to use that or is there a better one?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veriss1 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the BBC Live has stopped coverage as well. A Chilean source would probably be better, but http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidente_en_el_yacimiento_San_Jos%C3%A9_de_2010 doesn't (yet?) seem to have a better source. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 02:12, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * BBc feed still live. latest one out at 17 mins past the hour.©Geni 02:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Supporting evidence against a 22:18 extraction is that it's only 23 minutes from the extraction of the last miner, which would make it the fastest extraction so far. However, watching the celebration when the last miner came out, it definitely looked to me like they stopped work for at least a few minutes which would make this less likely...this is just conjecture, of course. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 02:15, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, how do we know the order in which the rescuers are being extracted? I.e. are times being assigned to the right people?--81.106.147.132 (talk) 02:20, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They announced "first in, first out" at one point on the broadcast. That's all I've got to go on. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Per BBC live feed text concerning first miner "2236: ...the first rescue worker is now out of the shaft." At this point we can be sure it was prior to 22:36. The mining minister clearly stated first in first out. We need to find a Chilean source, hopefully they are covering it more closely. Veriss (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

At 23:30, the Fenix 2 is at the bottom of the shaft, and it appears that there were only two rescuers down there. The second-to-last rescuer got in the Fenix, leaving one person on the bottom. So it looks like we're missing one rescuer time. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 02:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Another Chilean minute-to-minute feed is at http://www.eluniversal.com/2010/10/12/int_esp_minuto-a-minuto-resc_12A4598573.shtml but my Spanish isn't reliable enough to use it myself. Veriss (talk) 02:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Penultimate rescuer (whoever he is) comes out at 00:03 local time. C. Scott Ananian (talk) 03:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There was also a live feed on NBC and CNN 24.92.138.9 (talk) 01:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Chile changed to summer time the Sunday prior to the rescue, the BBC was using winter time. Pristino (talk) 10:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Anticipating Future Questions
74.37.237.216 (talk) 11:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Here are some questions that people will be asking later that would be great to document the answers for. The answers/facts could be incorporated into the article text.
 * If the rescue capsule door is secured from the outside, how do the final rescuer ascend? Will the mine collapse be cleared and the remaining equipment left in the workshop be removed? How were power and connectivity delivered? (e.g., fiberoptic cable through ventilation shaft, etc.) How much longer will cleanup work at the mine take? Will the site be closed off, or will people be allowed to return for annual remembrances, etc.? Will the rescue shaft be more permanently closed?
 * The last man out (Manuel González, a rescuer) climbed unaided into the capsule (which swayed somewhat, with nobody to steady it), bolted the capsule door from inside, and put his own safety harness on. I watched it on a live video feed from Chile (and some of it live from in the mine) in a web page that was linked to from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special_reports/chile_mine/ . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Given that, after the mine collapse, the pre-existing ventilation shafts remained sufficiently clear to provide the trapped miners with fresh air, why were rescuers not able to make use of them to at least establish initial communication with the men? Granted that the routes of these shafts are quite circuitous, but doesn't the technology exist to navigate such routes?  Much has been made in recent years of small, autonomous robots that can travel through the debris of collapsed buildings (after earthquakes, for instance) to locate survivors.  Was this not a good application for such technology?  Was this, in fact, tried? Convit (talk) 04:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the ventilation shaft collapsed as a couple of rescuers went down through it, and they were nearly killed. This was right after the collapse of the mine. Pristino (talk) 10:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

We need to clean up a dozen three five zero left {Citation Needed} tags (Done for now)
We currently have at least eleven {citation needed} tags still in the article. The article is really looking good now and we may be ready for reassessment but we need to clean some stuff up first.

If everyone who reads this can look at just one tag and resolve it, we should be able to clean them up very quickly.

I'll knock out a couple tonight myself before I add yet more stuff tomorrow. Veriss (talk) 05:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I know what you mean.   But it's funny...because these past few days, part of my editing work on this article was adding needed citations per the tag requests.   I think I put at least maybe 5 or 6 new references (searching and getting them and placing them properly) to cover those "citation needed" tags.   They're still more on the article, as you point out, though... ResearchRave (talk) 06:45, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, got cleaned up fast! I think we're now down to three outstanding {citation needed} tags before I log off for the night.


 * @ResearchRave, I saw you fixed a bunch recently, that was cool of you. In some cases it appears that text moved around so the content didn't match up to the sources.  We went through some heavy editing the past couple days so that's probably the nature of the beast.  Cheers everyone.  Veriss (talk) 07:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Fixed ton of them and we're back up to five now. :-( Veriss (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Variations between lists of miners' names
There seems to be some variation in the miners' names:-
 * A is their names as in http://www.emol.com/noticias/nacional/detalle/detallenoticias.asp?idnoticia=429013
 * B is those names rearranged to match the order in 2010 Copiapó mining accident
 * C is their names as in 2010 Copiapó mining accident


 * Unmatched names in 2010 Copiapó mining accident: Esteban Rojas, Claudio Acuña
 * Unmatched names in http://www.emol.com/noticias/nacional/detalle/detallenoticias.asp?idnoticia=429013: Roberto López Bordones, William Órdenes
 * Page Franklin Lobos says that his full name is Franklin Erasmo Lobos Ramírez.
 * Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please see the article on Spanish naming customs. Specifically, "In most situations, the practice is to use one given name and the first surname only, the full name being used in legal, formal, and documentary matters." I believe in this case, it is appropriate to use the given name and first (paternal) surname, as that's the "common" name that's used. That formatting is what we have seen in most media coverage, both in English and in Spanish media, and is the form already generally in use here. So I think most of the entries are correct, although some do seem to need cleanup. 71.57.48.148 (talk) 15:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that. But there are still these queries:
 * The two non-matching names Esteban Rojas, Claudio Acuña versus Roberto López Bordones, William Órdenes.
 * The spelling variations in the two names that I have marked with (?).
 * Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Apparently, the El Mercurio list was the very early one published by ONEMI, which included incorrectly two other miners. --Diego Grez (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * What's the status of this issue? Is it resolved or do we need to do more to fix it?  Veriss (talk) 18:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have described this discrepancy in 2010 Copiapó mining accident. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * So it appears that it is fixed and the correct names are on the list now. Great detective work, it would have been embarrassing if we never caught it.  Since the list is correct now, why do we need the notice?  Veriss (talk) 06:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Good news, I built the comments section on the list from the profiles article on The Telegraph and there were no left over people. I think it's fixed and we can take the notice off unless I'm missing something.  Veriss (talk) 07:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The exact location of the initial collapse? (Spanish help?)
Can anyone please confirm which location of the first/main collapse is the right one? The one currently shown in the picture in the article, which is relatively high up in the mine, or the one that I've seen on many other websites (such as for example in the picture on this page on CNN website), which seems to be much lower in the mine)?

Just FYI, here on this page on Dailymail website is another interesting graphic showing the mine, capsule, ventilation shafts etc., though unfortunately this one's not showing the location of collapse. --Wayfarer (talk) 02:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)




 * I haven't seen anything with more specific information about the exact location of the collapse in the English speaking media and I've done a LOT of reading on it. I suspect that the answer may be in mining, engineering or geology related professional publications and not in the mass media.  Perhaps our Spanish speaking editors can locate it in local media.  I'll changed the section heading to get their attention.


 * I suspect that whoever made the graphic illustrations didn't have any idea of exactly where the collapse occurred either and that may explain the difference in the graphic aids. Veriss (talk) 23:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, it is our image that is wrong (CNN are wrong as well, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest). You can click through this slideshow (in Spanish), which was supposedly the reference for our image, and see that the levels don't match at all. The slideshow from La Tercera (Chilean newspaper) can be compared with this slideshow (in English) from the Chilean Mining Ministry: the levels match, although the Mining Ministry just talks about a "mega-block". BTW the Mining Ministry slideshow was obviously created early on in the rescue effort, and has some interesting background information. Physchim62 (talk) 23:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you both (i.e. Veriss & Physchim62) for your valuable opinions/discoveries/input! I'm just downloading the mentioned slideshow and will check it out myself. --Wayfarer (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Chant
So what was that chant that was being chanted every time a miner came out?71.142.213.240 (talk) 07:40, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

CHI CHI CHI LE LE LE... CHILE 24.92.138.9 (talk) 12:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

"Ce Hache I. I. Ele E. Le. Chi-chi-chi, Le-le-le. Vi-va Chi-le!". "Vi-va" was replaced with "Los mi-ne-ros de" many times. Pristino (talk) 11:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The first part of the chant is spelling out the word "Chile" in Spanish, just in case any non-Spanish speakers are wondering! Physchim62 (talk) 00:44, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Who wrote the famous note?
I have just changed the article,, removing the assertion that the famous note was written by Mario Gómez. The BBC News website says that the note was written by José Ojeda. See here. You will need to click on Ojeda's picture - top row, seventh from the left. I have not added to the article that Ojeda wrote it, in case this is disputed. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 22:18, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I did a Google search on the phrase "who wrote the famous chile rescue note?" looking for the most authoritative source (like the BBC, NY Times or London Telegraph) and found BBC contradicting itself here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11460245. I'll look for some more sources in a bit.  That was as good catch and you were correct to remove it until it can be properly sourced.  Veriss (talk) 22:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * El Mercurio says it was Ojeda http://www.mer.cl/modulos/catalogo/Paginas/2010/10/10/MERSTRE010RR1010.htm?idnoticia=C52115320101010,C52109620101010. Gómez sent some other messages out, so this is quite possibly the source of the confusion. MissWizzy (talk) 23:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In my quick survey of the Google results it seems the vast majority of them were referring to Ojeda. I think it's safe to go with that.  Veriss (talk) 23:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I remember clearly that the Associated Press said that Mario Gómez wrote the note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.138.9 (talk) 15:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The BBC and the London Telegraph both contradict themselves in their graphic aids on this subject. The El Mercurio source is also a graphic supplement and they had an issue with releasing an incorrect list of names that caused us to add a notice to the article. I did find a source on the Sydney Morning Herald in the text of a news article so think it's safe to run with that as a source: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/miners-rescue-brings-a-flash-of-global-joy-20101014-16lr3.html. I'll put it back in for now pending objections or a better source(s). Veriss (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * TVN, and the other Chilean channels which broadcasted the rescue emphasized that the note was written by Mario Gómez, and not by Ojeda. Diego Grez (talk) 22:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Veriss (talk) 00:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I just noticed Diego Grez's comment that was out of chronological order. I'm not sure where to look for a definitive answer at this point.  Veriss (talk) 00:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe there isn't a "definitive" answer at this point ;) Physchim62 (talk) 00:57, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, does it? Though the BBC's interviewer made a big deal over the copyright status of the note in his interview with Piñera during the rescue, identifying the author is not crucial to this article. If there does happen to be some argument over the ownership later that will also clear up the question of authorship. MissWizzy (talk) 01:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That makes sense MissWizzy. I removed it completely, along with it's citation.  .  Veriss (talk) 02:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Links
What is the rule on linking to other articles? The article has links to all sorts of things that I would regard as fairly useless as an aid in explaining the context such as: miner (after mining has already been linked), shampoo, sunglasses, tracksuit, transcontinental, website, banner, survival, etc., etc., etc., If the policy is to link to anything that has an article then no action is needed, but I thought I'd ask for some clarification. (sorry, forgot to sign MissWizzy (talk) 00:12, 18 October 2010 (UTC))


 * Hello, MissWizzy....A good question.   Basically in a nutshell, there is no dogmatic rule.   It's almost any word, phrase, or topic, that has a WP article, or inter-link, that can arguably be linked.   It should not have to be everything under the sun...., but even if it's not directly related to the first article in question, words and subjects can STILL be linked.  (To build knowledge and reference access, on WP, etc.)   Some discretion should be done though.    The basic gist can be found on WP:LINKS-Principles.  Like "it aims to 'build the web' to enable readers to find relevant information on other pages with just a click of the mouse. Therefore in adding or removing links, consider an article's place in the knowledge tree."


 * Theoretically most words or phrases on an article that have supporting WP articles for them can be wiki-linked....even somewhat unrelated topics sometimes, though it should not be necessarily every little thing. It depends.  And again, there's no hard-fast rule per se.   A person doesn't want to go crazy on linking everything, but on the other hand, sometimes it makes it easy and convenient to have easy click-access to words and subjects, also found on WP, that may be of interest or importance.  It can be argued, that in one way or another, to varying degrees, most everything is at least somewhat "related."


 * Again, it depends.  But definitely things that are obviously more directly related to the original article should be linked  immediately, without question.  Anyway, I hope this helped a little bit. Cheers. ResearchRave (talk) 03:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have been linking more then I normally do on this particular article because of the large international interest. I think we have a lot of readers who's English is not their primary language.  I think it makes it easier for the reader to quickly look up a word and then continue reading.  Also, some of the more clever links use one word that is displayed for the article but the link points to a different article then you would expect; i.e., the link President of Brazil actually points to Mr. Silva's page and is shown when the reader hovers their mouse over it...saving space, clutter and words for those who know that President's name.


 * All minor stuff to be sure. Too many links rarely bother me when I'm reading, except for an unbroken line of multiple links in a lead sentence so you're not sure what's being linked.  As a reader I'd rather have the links then not.  Besides, only in Wiki can you start out looking up some obscure politician and find yourself an hour later reading about chimpanzee speech experiments and only ever typing one word.  Veriss (talk) 05:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I still think it a bit silly to link such things as survival, waterfall, prayer, shampoo and safety. MissWizzy (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed, I'll help you unlink some of the sillier ones. Feel free to change the tag here to resolved.  Veriss (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree. We can do some unlinking: if we go to far, links can always be replaced. It's not a drama to link or to unlink, let's not worry too much about it. Physchim62 (talk) 00:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Can't find a source Pinera's "New Deal" speech (Spanish help may be needed)
I Googled using all sorts of different terms for several hours and cannot find a source for this speech anywhere.


 * "After all the miners were rescued, Piñera gave a speech on location in which he was effusive in his praise of Chile and said he was "proud to be the president of all Chileans." He invoked Chile's recently passed bicentennial celebrations and said the miners were rescued with "unity, hope and faith." He also thanked Chávez and Morales, amongst others for their calls of support and solidarity. He said those who forced the rescue (i.e. those responsible for the collapse of the mine) would be punished, and said there would be a "new deal" with the workers. "

The source I did add addressed the general topic but not the actual speech he made on-site just after the rescue. Does it exist in Spanish language media? I need help with this. Veriss (talk) 05:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't found the complete text anywhere (someone else asked the question a couple of days ago), but here are some lengthy extracts (in Spanish) on the official site of the Chilean Presidency. I guess the speech was a bit "ab lib", so there isn't an official text. The extracts cover all the points in that paragraph. Physchim62 (talk) 15:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That should do the trick, I'll add it as the reference so we can remove that tag. Google Translate seemed to handle it pretty well.  Thank you Physchim62.  Veriss (talk) 16:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Removed Unsourced Statement
I worked to clean up all the statements' sources and I could not find any notable, verifiable sources for this statement so moved it here until someone can find a source.


 * When they were rescued the miners were all wearing similar t-shirts. The T-shirts, sent down by a brother of one of the miners had "Thank you Lord" on the front and "To Him be the glory and honor" on the back. The quotation was taken from the Book of Psalms 95 verse 4: "...in his hands are the depths of the earth."

The only source I could find that was not a blog was from the Baptist Press which has questionable notability and objectivity.

Some of the problems I see with it are:


 * as worded it is misleading in that not all the miners wore them (per photos and videos of the rescue) so it wasn't a "team thing"
 * mainstream media referred to them as patriotic shirts because of the Chilean flag abstracts
 * the Baptist Press is a dubious source and blogs are not objective, notable or reliable
 * it appears to be WP:Coatrack

The religious section was a compromise, some editors didn't want any religious items in the article at all. Let's source it properly. Veriss (talk) 18:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sources (all in Spanish, I'm afraid): Venozelana de Televisión (Venezuelan state TV), Terra, El País (reports the quote as written on the overalls of one of the miners)
 * The three sources appear to be independent of one another, and all give the same quote. In Spanish: Porque en su mano están las profundidades de la tierra. Y las alturas de los montes son suyas. De Él es la honra y la gloria. Contrary to what is generally reported, only the first two sentences come from Psalms 95:4 ("In his hand are the deep places of the earth: the strength of the hills is his also." in the King James Bible): "To Him is the honour and the glory" was an addition by whoever printed up the T-shirts. Physchim62 (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You can just about read it all on this image. Note that the "Porque" ("because") at the start isn't in the original Psalm either. Physchim62 (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the exhaustive detective work and comprehensive translations once again Physchim62. Is there any interest in modifying this statement to resolve the concerns and putting it back in or do we just want to let it die?  There doesn't seem to be much interest in this.  Veriss (talk) 17:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect or missing references
There is a sentence in the first paragraph about instability in the mine causing previous accidents and one death, and another in the Background section that says the company has had a series of mishaps and seen the death of several workers in recent years. The fatality numbers are contradictory, so I looked at the referenced articles to try and resolve that problem, but I discovered that the references used do not appear to back up the claims. The first sentence uses http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11102478 as a reference; this BBC article does not say anything about deaths or instability and only says that the families ACCUSE the company of safety lapses. The second sentence uses http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/23/miners-trapped-alive-chile and http://www.miningweekly.com/article/rescuers-struggle-to-reach-trapped-miners-in-chile-2010-08-06 as references; the Guardian article does not seem to support anything in the sentence and the Mining Weekly article does not seem to exist. I am not sure how to proceed as I haven't been able to find any alternate references (searching for "Chile mining accident" is no help :) ). MissWizzy (talk) 10:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I know the sentences are correct, we just need to locate the articles to support it. Veriss (talk) 17:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I found one we already had but it was not attached to the statements you were concerned about. Families of trapped Chilean miners to sue mining firm, London Daily Telegraph.  I fixed the citations.  I also clarified the wording in the second paragraph of the background section to make the statements more clear about whether they were referring to the company or the San Jose Mine.  I believe this is fixed.  Veriss (talk) 20:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done, Veriss. The first sentence still isn't quite saying what is in the source though: there is no mention of a history of instability in any of the cited references. MissWizzy (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Added one more, 69-day trapped Chilean miners being lifted one by one to safety. Went to Asia via Switzerland to get it.  I heard the beer is better in Switzerland.  :=) Veriss (talk) 22:48, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Click "show" not displaying
We are told to click "Show" on the table of the names of the rescuers, but there is none to click. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.55.83 (talk) 12:02, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There is. Look to the left. It's obvious. ;) -Koppapa (talk) 12:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I asked on the user's talk page for information about their browser and operating system. The table still displays collapsed with a "show" link using Firefox v3.6.1 but seems to display open without a "show" link using Micro$oft Internet Explorer v8.0.6.  IE is often non-compliant with the newer web features so this may be the issue.  Veriss (talk) 17:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought collapsible features, such as navboxes, were supposed to be expanded by default, then auto-collapsed by javascript one time at page-load (to be re-opened manually if/when desired). That would let the content to be permanently visible (rather than permanently hidden) in case of javascript failure, old browser, restrictive client settings, etc. ―cobaltcigs 23:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's interesting... this is what I experience.  On FireFox (which I use most of the time) the "show-hide" collapse feature works JUST FINE....the way it should work.       BUT, on Internet Explorer (which I use on occasion for certain things) THE WHOLE LIST SHOWS AUTOMATICALLY, with no "show-hide" anything on there.     Why do you think that is?   Meaning, that it seems that at least certain people on certain computers, with certain systems, certain OS's, and certain web browsers (such as IE), will have the whole names shown outright, with no "show-display" collapse option anywhere. (Which is not really a big deal either way I think.) But I'm just pointing out, that at least on my computer, it works just fine on FireFox, but the collapse thing does not seem to work AT ALL on Internet Explorer. ResearchRave (talk) 00:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Since the article had become rather long, and will likely become longer and we would probably receive complaints about the lengthy table, I set the option to "auto-collapse" them. In other words if there are at least two tables on the page they will appear collapsed until the user clicks to expand them.  See the guide here: Help:Collapsing.  I think as long as the information is there, the auto-collapse state is a convenience feature.  If it proves to be an issue, it is easy enough to make them appear expanded by default or even not be collapsible at all.  Whatever the group thinks is best.  Veriss (talk) 01:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I was probably using Internet Explorer on 93.97.55.83. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 13:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Since you only mentioned that you couldn't see the link to expand or collapse the table, even after reading the discussion, and didn't mention that you couldn't see any data, we can assume that the data is available but the convenience of collapsing the table is not. (Psssst! Firefox is free and open source!)

International participation
I added a new section that documents the global participation of governments, corporations and volunteers toward the search, sustainment and recovery of the trapped men. Any contributions are welcome (pssst!!! sources!!!. Veriss (talk) 05:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Luis Urzúa will set record
Should Luis Urzúa's time trapped of 69 days, plus the hours/minutes since 14:00 local time (or whatever time is officially designated for the accident), be significantly highlighted to indicate the longest time a human has ever been trapped before rescue from a mine or other similar accident? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.139.35 (talk) 23:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Excellent point, should the record undergo any official verification to be added in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.113.40.1 (talk) 01:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, the Chilean government is asking the Guiness World Record company to consider all 33 miners as having spend the exact same time in the mines. This is because the order of rescue was arbitrated by the rescue workers, not the miners themselves.24.92.138.9 (talk) 23:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I haven't seen anything from Guiness about this yet, there search box brings up nothing about chile or miners. Has anyone else seen anything?  Veriss (talk) 01:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Removal of national flags in "Corporate" and "Private" collaboration sections
Corporations mentioned in "Corporate" subsection are not "national" but private. Using flags in this context is an abuse to my best understanding. The same regarding private participations. Manual of Style (icons) advises against exaggerating nationalistic references. And this is such a case. To illustrate "globality", you don't need those flags. --IANVS (talk) 07:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That is an extremely narrow interpretation. Veriss (talk) 07:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Not at all. Manual of Style (icons) literally says:


 * "Wikipedia is not a place for nationalistic pride. Flags are visually striking, and placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things. For example, with an English flag next to him, Paul McCartney looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles"; without the flag next to him, he looks like an "English singer-songwriter from Liverpool who was in the Beatles". Emphasizing the importance of a person's citizenship or nationality above their other qualities risks violating Wikipedia's "Neutral point of view" policy."


 * Private corporations and individuals clearly fit into this description. Salut, --IANVS (talk) 07:19, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The purpose of the flags was merely to indicate at a glance the true global participation of the support for the operation. I believe that the flags beside the corporations were not "exaggerating" their nationality but serving to quickly illustrate the broader concern and dedication to finding the solution to get them out alive.  A line of eight flags delivers the message much more effectively then a list of eight bullets of text.  All of the corporations are either wholey owned and operated within that country or are strongly associated in the public's eye with that country; i.e. Samsung with Korea.  I think you are interpreting it much, much too narrowly.  Veriss (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * First of all, "usual (popular) associations" between corporations and nations do not make a corporation truly "national". But, in any case: Is nationality the most important aspect to draw from corporations and individuals that helped on this? I think it is not. It is an over-emphatization of nationality in a matter not directly relationed with nationality. To draw attention over the global response, you can have an introductory paragraph explaining its scope. You don't need flags. --IANVS (talk) 08:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I still disagree but there is no consensus so I have edited the section to make it readable without the huge wall of text. Veriss (talk) 17:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Adriana Barrientos
I removed Adriana Barrientos' "suggestion" of performing a striptease for every single miner, from the private participation section. In my opinion, it does not add anything noteworthy to the article, than just advertising one person, who is only known for scandals in reality shows and her childishness, in Chile. Feel free to revert me though. Diego Grez (talk) 02:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * From what you related, I agree. I thought someone who knew better would delete her if needed.  Veriss (talk) 03:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Are we ready for reassessment?
We are currently rated "C" class across the board for the various projects this article belongs to. I think the article looks really good and clean now. Does anyone have any opinions on if we are ready for reassessment yet? If not, what do we need to focus on yet? If so, what is the process for requesting it?

Thanks and cheers! Veriss (talk) 18:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC) I'd suggest holding off until the page has dropped off the "In the news" section of the Main Page, and then asking at the talk pages of the WikiProjects involved for them to take a look and make suggestions. Physchim62 (talk) 01:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A good to-do thing is to request a peer review. In less than a week you'll get a detailed response with what to improve, etc. Then, we can think of reassessment I think. Diego Grez (talk) 22:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Good pointer. The peer review page had a link to a lower level of review called RFF.  Since we can only request peer review once a week, should we go to the Request for Feedback page first?  Veriss (talk) 00:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You won't have much luck with the Chile WikiProject, as it seems I'm the only 'pedian active there! However, if you ever need help with some reference in Spanish, etc. leave me a message on my talk page. Diego Grez (talk) 01:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * How many virtual cervezas for an "A" grade in the Chile project? Just kidding. :-) By the way, did bots give us the C ratings?  I don't recall seeing any assessment reports.  Veriss (talk) 17:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * well "class C status" says it's a "substantial article" BUT "lacks important information" etc. I think that some of what might be missing is what I brought up days ago about how the miners acted underground (that's just one example maybe), some new details that have been coming to light in the last few days...    About how those miners acted and what they did (to keep warm, to keep sane, the fighting at first, the organizing later, etc etc) during those 10 weeks.  Perhaps some more of that should be put in the article.... to make it more than C status, and a bit "more complete". ResearchRave (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article seems much improved (and I'm proud of it! I was the creator of the article!). I would be glad to re-assess it as part of the Chile 'project. Although, I would like to see a section on the "reaction" in the popular culture. I've seen in TVN that some US-ian is going to film a Los 33 movie after Rodrigo Ortúzar's idea (Chilean filmmaker), and certain actor dressed as miner during some awards I can't remember exactly. The accident even changed Chile's "image" in the world, for something much happier than the 1973 coup d'état and Augusto Pinochet's dictatorship. If just someone volunteered to do that... Diego Grez (talk) 22:38, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think a section like that will be interesting and will certainly have material very soon. In many respects this wasn't just a man-made disaster, it was a social event with global impact and that aspect of it should be addressed.  One other thing I have thought the article needs is a sort of a professional critique section about the handling of the overall search and rescue.  I have some articles in mind for sources but have not taken the plunge yet.  I wanted to first find some time to review some of the other 'man-made disaster' articles to get an idea of how to present such a section.  Perhaps we should break down a task list so people can grab a task that interests them and work on it.  Veriss (talk) 22:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

@Physchim62, I took your advice in a way. We may see some new faces soonish. I posted invitations on the three "A Class" articles in the Disaster Management project to come give us an informal look over and offer suggestions (Andijan massacre, 2008 Sichuan earthquake and Hurricane Katrina. Perhaps we can get some ideas by looking over their articles too.  I am also looking for "A Class" mining and industrial accidents and will do the same on their pages.  I thought we should aim high for A Class and if we get GA, well, that's fine too.  Veriss (talk) 02:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Assessed as B-class, passed all the criterions of the Chile WikiProject. --Diego Grez (talk) 15:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Social impact of event
Diego Grez suggested earlier that we add a Social impact section. Hopefully it won't become a collection bin for loose gossip about their personal domestic situations unless it is notable in some way. Does anyone have any suggestions and sources that should be in it? Veriss (talk) 01:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Survival section?
ResearchRave suggested in the reassessment discussion that information is coming to light about how they survived the first 17 days. Is there interest and are there enough good sources for it yet? Please post your suggestions and sources here and we'll see if we can put something together. Also, suggest where it should be in the article. Cheers! Veriss (talk) 01:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Critique/Analysis of overall rescue operation
I looked at several other disaster related articles and one thing it seems we are missing is a 'critique' section of the handling of the event. I have been gathering some sources to start writing it but what I have found is almost universally positive. Has anyone seen any legitimate negative critique of the operation that isn't blatant geopolitical propaganda? Suggestions and sources? Veriss (talk) 01:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Need replacements for the images we lost
The nomination for deletion process completed and we lost our only image of the rescue. I found this image on Flickr.com with a liberal license but am not sure if the license is good enough. . It is an image of Mario Gomez after exiting the mine. Please let me know. Veriss (talk) 16:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I would think it twice before uploading that picture to the commons. It's the same one we had before of Mario Gómez, and it was ripped off the Government of Chile collection, that does not allow commercial use. But, I strongly suggest someone with great knowledge of the U.S. fair use-related laws (perhaps), or who writes well enough to justify the inclusion of some miner pic as a "historically significant photo" as fair use. But firstly we should select which picture we'll add. Diego Grez (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you Diego Grez, I had just come to that conclusion while reading up on the licenses.  I thought it looked too familiar.  I already uploaded it but won't add it to the article.  I think we can justify some historical value but I don't know the copyright rules well enough. I self-nominated the file for deletion.  It should be off the system now.  Thanks again.  Veriss (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw you took the plunge on the fair use concept. It looks good.  Too bad we can't find more.  Good work on that Diego Grez.  Cheers! Veriss (talk) 00:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Those pics snapped off tv from the channels didnt qualify? This is not commercial use in the first place, wikipedia make $0 off it.Lihaas (talk) 06:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we are bound to follow the WP:IUP, Image Use Policy. Essentially it means that the image must have been released into the public domain or have a free commercial reuse policy; gross simplification, it's more a more complex issue than that. There are thousands of images out there but only a very few meet the Wiki rules. We still need more graphics and images if you can find them. Veriss (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Status Update: The Chilean government changed the previous license for a set of 45ish pictures to a license that permits us to use them here. I think we have all we need except for some optional images....an image for Camp Hope, media scrums at Camp Hope and possibly celebrations at Copiapo or major cities. Let's keep looking for those. Veriss (talk) 23:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright of famous note
This seems to confirm that it was José Ojeda who wrote it. According to the BBC, he has now been granted copyright on the wording, and wants the president to give the original note back to him. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 20:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the note is not eligible for copyright, as it is just a bunch of letters. We are safe it won't be deleted from the Commons ;-) --Diego Grez (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Added this information back into the notes section for Ojeda along with the source. Veriss (talk) 23:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was what I meant when I posted above - not to suggest the photo should be deleted, but just to say that it now seems to be confirmed that Ojeda wrote it. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 15:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * This presents a slippery slope as all printed text is essentially a bunch of letters. ―cobaltcigs 22:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Current version
The current version gives the impression that the shaft in Plan A was widened. I am not sure if this was so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.139.117.17 (talk) 10:50, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ I rewrote the section I think you were referring to. Does that clear it up?  Veriss (talk) 22:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Using Spanish Wikipedia as a source
Footnote 124 (in the section "Order of the rescued miners", table for "Rescue workers who descended", column for "Affiliation", second footnote) leads to the same article on Spanish Wikipedia. Is that footnote necessary at all? If Spanish Wikipedia has a piece of information that we don't have, it's presumably sourced to a reliable Spanish-language publication, which we should use instead, if we don't have an English-language source and want to include that particular piece of info. (I'm not sure if that's the case here.) Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That shouldnt be. Wikipedia can't be cited for itself.Lihaas (talk) 17:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No, that is just unacceptable, not only because we can't cite ourselves, but because Spanish Wikipedia is the most unreliable encyclopedia according to several studies by trustworthy universities and scientists. I don't trust Es.Wikipedia for my homeworks, and I prefer Encarta, or I just do a Google search, but never use it. Diego Grez (talk) 19:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've removed the source. As there were three references for the "Affiliation" section, I don't know which piece of information, if any, the Spanish Wikipedia was used as a source for. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I think that was legacy stuff from the talk pages when we were trying to sort out the order of the rescuers and was meant to be temporary at the time. It may have been accidentally included when copied from this talk page to the article. I can't recall who added it. Good catch Greeneyes, we let a bad error slip for too long. Veriss (talk) 19:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Userbox
Well, I wanted to create an userbox for those who became fans of those awesome miners:

Just insert on your userpage. :-P -- Diego Grez (talk) 15:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I swiped a copy. ¡Mucho grassy @ss! p/s: it doubles as a great short cut back to our fave article too. Veriss (talk) 17:33, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Question: address to write the miners?
Another editor left this question on my talk page last night. "The information I would like to see is the address of where to send letters and cards to the miners. There is no information on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.184.124 (talk) 9:14 pm, Yesterday (UTC−4)" I searched the Chilean embassy to the US site with no luck. Anyone know? Veriss (talk) 17:22, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You could always try: Los 33, Copiapó, III, Chile. Physchim62 (talk) 18:10, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * lol, I don't think there is one (yet). Diego Grez (talk) 18:17, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * More seriously, the Chilean Ministry of Mining has a webpage where you can "leave your message to the 33 miners", as the Spanish header says. Physchim62 (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Will this work?


 * Los "33"
 * In Care of Mayor Maglio Cicardini Neyra
 * Office of the Mayor
 * 1530000 Copiapó
 * Chile

-- Veriss (talk) 18:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest the individual concerned contacts their local Chilean embassy. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 19:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

✅ Pasted the info on the user's talk page. Thanks everyone. Veriss (talk) 21:40, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That could also be used as an ELLihaas (talk) 15:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how to word an EL like that. Perhaps someone can take care of that.  Veriss (talk) 22:07, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

✅ I felt kind of corny putting a link to leave messages for the miners there so I also added official links the the government, ministry of Mining and the official press releases. Veriss (talk) 23:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Useful graphic was removed due to errors
I noticed that we removed the graphic. I really liked it myself and I personally never thought it was a scale representation. Can't we state in the caption that it is an abstract and not meant to be a scale drawing? I'll paste it in here to aid discussion. Veriss (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * For me, it's just too wrong. It's out by about 300 vertical metres (1000 feet) for the cave-ins. I've raised the matter on Commons, but I think we're better of having nothing than to be propagating information we know to be incorrect. Physchim62 (talk) 02:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I would like to consider putting the image back in the article but with a clear disclaimer that it is an abstract representation and the location of the collapse is not accurate. Veriss (talk) 19:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Would moving the explosion symbols ( ✹ ) to a lower elevation be sufficient or do we want to correct the general shape of the tunnels? ―cobaltcigs 23:26, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm happy with just moving the explosion symbols to (roughly) the correct depths. Physchim62 (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

The editor who originally created the graphic file has not replied to the graphic's talk page [Wiki Commons File Talk] for some time. If someone can work with layers in Inkscape or GIMP / Photoshop and fix the issues, we can add it back into the article. I think that image is valuable for illustrating a complex 3D event. (I'll give you a hero barnstar and maybe a cookie! Veriss (talk) 18:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think I fixed it! Revert me if I fucked it up ;-) --Diego Grez (talk) 03:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It looks great bro. Slap it in back in the article.  Did you learn to do layers in Inkscape just for the project?  Hahah....working on your third barnstar for this project....how about a cookie this time?  :-)  Veriss (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * LOL. I've been using Inkscape enough for a while to know how to move those explosion symbols, and to convert a bunch of letters to SVG ;-) I'm so hungry I need a cookie please! --Diego Grez (talk) 03:58, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Veriss (talk) 04:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yum! There is no cookie now :-P --Diego Grez (talk) 13:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Close, but not quite. The callouts on the left side no longer matched the locations of the collapse icons, and would leave someone unfamiliar with the history of the graphic baffled.  I've made the adjustments, as well as moved the icons slightly to better match the published depth figures of 268 and 325 meters.  The appearance of the graphic in Wikipedia sucks, though, due to algorithm errors in the way text elements in SVG images are scaled; the legend items overlap the box boundaries and callouts overlap their respective arrows.  Eventually, when everyone is happy with the image, the text elements need to be converted to paths.  They won't be editable as text anymore, but they'll maintain the correct relationship to each other at all sizes. (I tried linking to the archived version of the graphic here for discussion purposes, but I'm not sure if that can be done.  If you refresh the cached image in your browser, the image on this talk page will be the latest version, not the incorrect one that originally caused the discussion.)&mdash;QuicksilverT @ 19:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it looks good Quicksilver, thank you for fine tuning it. Veriss (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * This image is not an accurate map of the mIne, but a simplification. Channel 4 British TV program Buried Alive: The Chilean Mine Rescue, 8 pm to 9 pm, Wednesday 27 October 2010 showed a (CGI?) map of the mine, with many more than 10 spiral turns, not an even helix but irregular with the turns widely different sizes. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it's fair to call it an 'abstract. Veriss (talk) 22:33, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's accurate enough, based on the sources which the IDF gives. Let's not forget that many people won't even think to realize that a mine shaft has to go down in some sort of a spiral (otherwise the gradient would be too steep for machinery). Physchim62 (talk) 22:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Piñera and Golborne picture
I just found a Laurence Golborne and Sebastián Piñera picture, taken when they found the miners' message. I'm not sure where to add it. Could someone do that please? --Diego Grez (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

✅ Putting it in now. Veriss (talk) 19:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

There is also a pic of all (most) of the miners together in the hospital at miners in the hospital. Can we get that as well? Veriss (talk) 20:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think so. There is no "no editorial use" warning ;-) Importing to the Commons... Diego Grez (talk) 00:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Diego Grez (talk) 00:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

✅ Moved a pic to make room for your new pic in the 'miners post-rescue' section. Awesome man, you're so uber! I think the only pictures we might be lacking are a good one of the celebrations in Copiapó or someplace for the 'reactions' section and perhaps one of rescue medics. Or that spooky first black and white image is pretty iconic but not optimistic we can find it. It's really coming along now I think. Veriss (talk) 01:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I uploaded and added three new pics: the | first rescuer, |the 5th rescuer and the | mining leader. Also uploaded | First view of miners and | view of miners after discovery I think all we lack really is something for Camp Hope/families and possibly Copiapo/Santiago celebrations.  I also uploaded a new pic of | Franklin Lobos but am not sure we have room for it.  Can use it for his page since his old one was deleted though. Veriss (talk) 04:25, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Any objections to retitling this section "Need certain images" or similar? Mark it resolved and start a new one? Veriss (talk) 17:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

WP: Article size
this page is already beyond the recommended 100k, i think it should be to shorten it. Some of the rescue details and/or reaction can be moved to either a "rescue" page or the existing "reaction" page. he latter can include the rest of international contributions too, which would easily fit into the smaller reaction page.
 * ive gone ahead and done the latter, if there is objection then someone can undo it and continue further discussion hereLihaas (talk) 06:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well done Lihaas. The page was beginning to fill up with sensationalism, advertisments & unhealthy nationalism. Cablehorn (talk) 07:09, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * While the article is beyond 100Kbytes, it is currently only 16% greater than the 'recommended' length, which is not, IMHO, that terrible. If it continues to grow significantly then reduction edits would be appropriate. However, before deleting relevant material from the article, kindly transfer it into a subsidiary daughter article, and then create a condensed version of the deleted material to be left in its place in this article, along with the relevant {Main|daughter article name} link under the section title.  Thank you. HarryZilber (talk) 14:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Whoa! Scalpels, not machetes! The readable prose is only 63kb (text only version in my sandbox) after you subtract the images, huge list of references, etc., well within the "recommended" size for general articles. In any event, the upper limit is actually 400kb which we aren't even close to. To qualify for A class we will need to address some more topics within the article, as mentioned above, and I think we really do need more graphics and images so we should make room. I think we should move some information to daughter pages, such as corporate contributions, etc. but it's not a rush so lets move cautiously on that or people will become upset. Veriss (talk) 18:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * per harryzilber, the content was moved to a cited article, not removed/censored.
 * its seems users agree to that move. Lihaas (talk) 15:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Any objections to marking this as "resolved" for now? Veriss (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Shameful comercial exploitation of psychologically distressed miners
Could someone please explain why these items are mentioned in an artice about Chile?

🇺🇸 USA: - iPods - Steve Jobs - Apple Computer - iPod Touch - New York Marathon - Graceland - Elvis Presley

- Cablehorn (talk) 02:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * PS - This, and other similar statements, are dis-graceful:
 * "Oakley of California, provided free Radar sport sunglasses to each of the miners to protect their eyes from the harsh light after so many days underground. The product placement has been estimated to be worth more than US $40 million in publicity."
 * - Cablehorn (talk) 03:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There is a different perspective, perhaps the wording of the introductory paragraph for those sections needs to be better constructed to bring that out. There are at least sixteen corporations from eight nations listed to present the global participation in the rescue of the search for, sustainment of and then the rescue of those men. There was also a world-wide feeling of sympathy for them and their families so the donations from the Greek company, the Chilean entrepreneur, the UK and Spanish football clubs and other places were all mentioned in alphabetical order.  All of these items received prominent coverage by the press and I think to leave them out would be dishonest.


 * I was taking a break for a day or two from actively writing on the article and plan to move some of that content to the reactions daughter article which has a link in the Reactions section immediately above the section you refer to. Are you upset that the American companies are listed?  How about the Greek, South African, Australian, etc.?  Did you read the intros?  How would you prefer we present the corporate and private support and contribution information? Veriss (talk) 04:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * 1. What do you mean by "... American companies ..." ?
 * 2. Could you answer my first question - (dated 02:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC) - above)
 * - Cablehorn (talk) 04:43, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I thought I did answer it in the first paragraph of my response. Two reasons: Document the actions that contributed to the successful location, care and rescue of the men. Arguably, the families would be pounding crosses into the ground at the mine if the government tried to go it alone and didn't accept the assistance of both public and private industry who did the heavy lifting. They are mentioned because it is notable, verifiable and germane to the success of the rescue. The contributions to the miners section is also there to show the worldwide sympathy and concern from Greece to Graceland and many points in between. What would you like changed and why? Veriss (talk) 04:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, exactly who's actions are shameful? The corporations for contributing, the media for reporting some contributions more heavily then others or me for researching and writing a large portion of the section you are unhappy with? The words shameful and exploitation are two very strong words. Who they are targeted at. Thanks, Veriss (talk) 05:15, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll answer your question. It is shameful and disgraceful that this story of humanity at its best is written by Wiki Eds to make it seem like the miners won 2nd prize in a tacky TV game show with the sponsors getting a "special" mention. Apple gets mentioned a couple of times because Chile didn't want their few thousand dollars of stuff. You still have not answered my only two questions - the first (dated 02:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC) ) and the second (dated 04:43, 24 October 2010 (UTC) ).
 * Regards - Cablehorn (talk) 05:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I answered this question twice; "Could someone please explain why these items are mentioned in an artice about Chile?". First, I do not see it as an article about Chile.  I see it as an article about a search and rescue operation after a mining accident that involved many different participants from all across the globe.  The victims, their family members and the key decision makers are Chilean, yes, (plus a Bolivian) but many of the key actors were not Chilean.  How do you think my answers fail to answer your question?  What would you like changed and why?  Veriss (talk) 05:41, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I didn't answer the second question because we hadn't gotten through the first one yet. I believe your second question was 1. What do you mean by "... American companies ..." ?  I asked that because you went out of your way to  wiki link (in other words emphasize) eight American items (people, places or things) from the article but made no mention of Manchester United or Real Madrid who also received a huge amount of positive press coverage for sending signed t-shirts to the miners.  I spent hours researching who participated and what they did and I'll accept responsibility for any failure of that content.  If I missed other participants, please let me know and I'll include them as well in the most balanced way I can.  Why did you focus on the those contributions and not mention the South African or the Austrian for example?  I ask this so I can understand what content you want changed and why.  Thanks, Veriss (talk) 05:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Question 1: " Could someone please explain why these items - (of all the shiny things on God's Earth) - are mentioned ... [at all] ... in an artice about Chile? ... (Ok, let's have it from your perspective. Let's call it 'Humanity' rather than 'Chile')


 * 🇺🇸 USA: (i.e. flag) - iPods - Steve Jobs - Apple Computer - iPod Touch - New York Marathon - Graceland - Elvis Presley "


 * Question 2: " What do you mean by "... American companies ..." ? " - i.e. Which American country/countries' companies are you referring to ?


 * Simple. Regards - Cablehorn (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm just not getting it so will look at it again later. Veriss (talk) 06:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They are not related in any way to the country, but they offered their help to the miners, and that's the reason they are in the article. Diego Grez (talk) 19:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Apple stuff products being mentioned four times does seem rather excessive. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 19:33, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I found three mentions of iPod and replaced two of them with this edit Difference view removing two uses of the word iPod. That leaves the name "Apple" and the mention of [iPod] in Apple's entry.  This is the feedback I was trying to get to last night but I was becoming frustrated.  I'll be happy to improve anything else.  What else needs to be changed?  Veriss (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I would suggest these mentions occur because they were first made in reliable sources that have taken notice of the issue and chosen to comment. That makes them suitable for discussion in the article because it is verifiable. This is the usual reason information is covered in articles. I was fed up of hearing about Oakley sunglasses in the TV reports, but thankful for the stat contained in the article on the value of the publicity. Veriss, I would suggest changing "iPod" to "personal media player" is an unnecessary obfuscation ( long word of the day! ) of the facts, the edit makes the article slightly less precise. But no big deal. Well done all on the article, an impressive read. Bigger digger (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Notice: Editors continued with previously discussed plans to move portions below the "reactions" section into a previously existing daughter article named Reaction to the 2010 Copiapó mining accident. Some information may return to this article in a summarized fashion but the detailed list is intended to be maintained on the daughter article. For purposes of continuity, I suggest that the discussion continue here as if the material had not been moved. Veriss (talk) 21:56, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Are there still concerns about this? Veriss (talk) 17:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Added {todolist} to the talk page
I added a To-do list to the talk page. I added some starter tasks that have been lingering on our talk pages to it so everything is in one spot. Every editor is free to add to and update it. If you feel like taking on a task, you can add In progress ~  to the end of the desired item. Try not to delete the "|blahblah =" lines.

I mostly added items that already existed on our talk page that no one objected to and also some common sense reminder type things like 'follow up on the litigation' so we can keep the article up to date.

It seems fairly easy to use. One quirk it has is that you need to click the refresh button to see recent updates occasionally. The actual listed data is kept on a subpage to this page so it won't clutter this page up.

This isn't a dictatorial type thing, it is meant to make it easy to see which tasks are still outstanding without having to scroll through all of the rather long talk page. Major new tasks should of course have a section on this talk page before they surprise everyone on the todo list of course just like we always do. The todo list isn't a discussion board, the discussion should still go on here as it always has.

It does have some formatting inconsistencies that I haven't figured out yet so if you are already familiar with the tool please see what I did wrong.

If we don't like it we can always get rid of it. Thoughts and suggestions?

Cheers, Veriss (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought the list was too long so shorted it quite a bit. Cheers,Veriss (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

"Estamos bien en el refugio los 33" nominated for deletion at Commons

 * thumb|right|This one...
 * thumb|right|...and this one.

Just to notify you that the miners' message has been nominated for deletion at Commons, including one picture from Wikinews which contains it too.


 * Link 1
 * Link 2

The nominator for deletion claims that it is copyrighted in Chile. Yes, it was copyrighted by José Ojeda, the miner who wrote it, but a sentence of letters has not enough creativity to be copyrighted. Diego Grez (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that's a winning argument in that forum. You many need to get someone familiar with fair use and Chilean copyright law to look into the issue.  Veriss (talk) 22:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No. Certainly we can use commons:Template:PD-text in our favour. A simple sentence like that, which has been used several times on many places, certainly can't be copyrighted. A re-drawn of the original cannot either. José Ojeda copyrighted something that is uncopyrighteable, and will cannot stop President Piñera from using it on his Presidential visits on other countries, by example. Fair use is not accepted on Commons, but the "Estamos bien" message is simply not copyrighted. Diego Grez (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, I'm sure there have been articles or at least editorial discussions about this situation in Chilean or regional newspapers that you can use to back this up. A couple of 3rd party sources will go along way towards killing that nomination.  Perhaps you can ask on the sister article talk page on the es:wiki but be cautious of WP:Canvass.  I don't believe it is canvassing when talking about it here because it is a key graphic in our article and we have the right to discuss the graphic's future.  I don't think I can find much in the English language press.  Veriss (talk) 23:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have found this. By the way, remember that the thing is not whenever we think the image should or shouldn't get copyright protection, but whenever it did receive it or not. MBelgrano (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The image issues are the most frustrating part of this project. Has anyone seen anything in the local media yet that says it's all an exageration?  Veriss (talk) 07:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree, it's a really complicated issue, there are few rules that are not subject to exceptions or complicated conditions, and many national laws give copyright protection to really unreasonable things that nobody would bother protecting elsewhere. In any case, someone should inform of this at the article in Wikipedia in Spanish, if this protection has been denied surely someone there will know. MBelgrano (talk) 13:35, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The administrators haven't made a decision yet on this key file. If you have relevant information about the legal status or the reliability of the request for copyright of the phrase, please contribute to the discussion so it may be resolved. Veriss (talk) 14:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC)