Talk:2021 Fukushima earthquake

ITN nomination
Just a notice to editors that this article was nominated on In the news/Candidates on February 14, 2021. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:42, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

ShakeMap intensity


This ShakeMap image is outdated as the USGS had revised the focal depth and intensity. Could someone upload a new image? Dora the Axe-plorer (talk) 11:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , ✅  HurricaneEdgar    14:48, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The USGS has updated their shakemap intensity and depth, could someone replace that again? Thx.--Dora the Axe-plorer (talk) 13:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Is a seismic intensity table really necessary?
I find it a bit confusing to read and navigate a table of seismic intensities. I find it unnecessarily complicated. Anyone looking at a table is not going to immediately know where and how strong the earthquake was felt. I live in the SF Bay Area, and if I were to include a bunch of Bay Area towns that felt, say, the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the list would not only get long but would also be difficult for readers outside the Bay Area to understand.

I think a map does a sufficient job at showing where an earthquake was felt and where damage occurred. Aasim (talk) 09:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Both have been included in several Japanese earthquake articles to maintain both local and global context. I personally prefer the charts to the map, but I think they complement each other quite well. It should be left as is.  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  14:20, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thinking about it a second time, Japan is a pretty small island nation, so maybe it would be useful to know which prefectures experienced which intensity. So maybe Japan is a special case; other small countries it would make sense as well. But I would definitely not do it for an earthquake in California, as there are so many counties in the US and you do not learn the names of state's counties or parishes, just national provinces... Aasim (talk) 10:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm not super familiar with that article, so that's a discussion to be had there (if at all). I don't know if Dora the Axe-plorer is going to comment here, but it seems we've already reached a consensus to leave the chart as it is.  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  00:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

March earthquake of similar strength
Just happened. Same place, basically the same strength. Add it to the existing article? Start a new article? https://www.jma.go.jp/en/quake/ 130.87.88.117 (talk) 09:26, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Someone started an article: March 2021 Miyagi earthquake. 130.87.88.117 (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Maps in infobox
There are now three maps in the infobox. While I'm not saying any one of them is less important than the others, I think the editors working on this page should take a look at the articles in Category:FA-Class WikiProject Earthquakes articles for inspiration, as this article has the potential to reach that level of quality at some point. All of those articles have a maximum of one map in the infobox and any intensity maps are placed within the relevant sections of the article-which for this article would be the Seismic intensity section. As discussed before, both the JMA and USGS scales should be used here, so its fine to include both maps, but within the article's body.  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano ☕️  01:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)