Talk:Wildfire/Archive 2

Black Body Radiation
This research paper has very interesting spectra: http://uvb.nrel.colostate.edu/UVB/publications/Fire.pdf. Would there be consensus to extracting a few facts about Plank black body spectra and temperatures characteristic of forest fires? Does anyone know a better reference? Bridgettttttte (talk) 22:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll try to work on something simple and short. It might be necessary to redraw a figure from the publication cited above. Bridgettttttte (talk) 11:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add anything that's verifiable, but imo Wildfire is a general overview of the topic. More technical info like IR spectroscopic bands might be better suited for Remote sensing or a new article titled Wildfire detection.  Mr Bell  ( talk ) 20:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * imho (lol), agreed. But I still have to redraw figures, and I guess I have to take out an account on wikimedia commons and deposit? Bridgettttttte (talk) 04:40, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Donation from CE of Severe weather
Fire intensity also increases during daytime hours. Burn rates of smoldering logs are up to five times greater during the day due to lower humidity, increased temperatures, and increased wind speeds. Sunlight warms the ground during the day and causes air currents to travel uphill, and downhill during the night as the land cools. Wildfires are fanned by these winds and often follow the air currents over hills and through valleys. Fires in Europe occur frequently during the hours of 12:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. U.S. wildfire operations revolve around a 24-hour fire day that begins at 1000 hours due to the predictable increase in intensity resulting from the daytime warmth.

This information does not fit the original article and my be of interest to this one. Also, created an archive for your talk page, looked like you could use one. Respectfully Bullock    ✉  02:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Merge from Bushfire
Merging Bushfire into this article has been a perennial proposal, but has usually fizzled for one reason or another. The main reasons for doing so are: The main reason against is that bushfires in Australia have their own unique characteristics, and bushfires are part of Australian culture. In my mind this can be substantially addressed by creating a "regional differences" section, or even just mentioning the regions that use each word (eg forest fire for North America, bushfire in South Africa and Australia). There already exists an article called Bushfires in Australia, which should probably be linked to at the top of this article with a disambig along the lines of Any additional information in Bushfire, such as the incomplete list of Australian bushfires, should be forked to List of Australian bushfires. Please share your thoughts below.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 10:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)\
 * There is alot alot alot and alot of alot of alot of alot of alot substantial difference between a bushfire and a wildfire
 * The Wildfire article is far superior to the bushfire article in both content and style
 * A good proportion of the Bushfire article in fact deals with American wildfires
 * The Wildfire article already deals with much Australian-specific content, such as the links to Country Fire Service.

Also another point is the predominately US centric fire fighting articles make little allowance for other methods, and other ways of looking at things SatuSuro 12:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Strongly against merging - they are quite different fire types, and fire fighting bodies, fire fighting methods, and terminology - at least the WP Trains accepts there are different worlds in relation to railway/railroad systems (ie British, US, european etc), and allows for separate terminology and systems. If it were to expand and develop beyond this - the Australian possible articles that could develop in time beyond what they are at the moment would become patently obviously different - from US versions.


 * Strongly oppose taking Yeti Hunter's points one by one:
 * Australian bushfires are substantially different from other wildfires because, amongst other things, of the specific characteristics of the dry sclerophyl forest which predominates much of this country and poses such severe risks and causes particular fire behaviour.
 * The Wildfire article is different to the bushfire article, whether it is better is a matter of opinion, if the bushfire article needs improvement it is not a reason to merge it, rather to improve it.
 * So the bushfire article is a more rounded article. Good.  Perhaps the Wildfire article could be similarly improved.
 * There is hardly any Australian content in the Wildfire article, it may well link to the various fire authorities but links are not content, you cannot get away from the fact that the Wildefire article is almost completely North American centric. That is fine, just don't pretend that it is a globally focussed article, it is blindingly obvious that it is focussed very tightly on what goes on in the good old US of A, oh, and a bit of Canada too (gotta keep the Kanacks happy, you know pal.)  We don't need you to tell us how to do everything, the American perspective is not the only one.  Leave the Bushfire article alone, if your idea of improvement is to swallow it up in a lot of (to coin a phrase) US fire-cultural imperialism . -  Nick Thorne  talk  14:00, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Nick please AGF. The merger proposal isn't unreasonable as there is a lot of overlap and despite past proposals the Aussie article is still a bit of a dog's breakfast.  –Moondyne 04:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, struck inappropriate comments. - Nick Thorne  talk  22:05, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * A quick look at my contribs (or my spelling) would make it abundantly clear that I'm an Australian. Not that it matters; you can improve the encyclopaedia from anywhere in the world. Your points, one by one:
 * Australia is not unique in having flammable trees.
 * The wildfire article is GA class versus start class, to be precise.
 * By "more rounded" I assume you mean contains North American information too, in conflict with your first point.
 * Bushfire is a regional word for a global topic; as such you would expect specifically Australian content to be limited. I think your claims of the US-centricism of the article are misplaced - it offers a very wide range of regional examples and data. The term "wildfire" is not American - It was specifically chosen to be as region-neutral as possible. I'm trying to improve the Australian articles, not subsume them. "Leaving the bushfire article alone" is exactly what's been done every time in the past after merge was opposed. --Yeti Hunter (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Suggest instead merge Bushfire to Bushfires in Australia and make Bushfire a redirect to that article.  I think that would better focus editors on what the article is about.  Having both doesn't sit right IMO. –Moondyne 04:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd support that. Readers could be disambiguated to Wildfire, and it wouldn't provoke lamentations of Americanisation (or would that be Americanization?).--Yeti Hunter (talk) 22:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose While the Wildfire article is good, it doesn't focus on bushfires and the effects in Australia. Fire maybe fire, the forests, savannah and grassland in the US is totally different then Australia's forests, savannah and grassland, as is the geography, flora and climate. I'm with Moondyne, merging Bushfire to Bushfires in Australia. Bidgee (talk) 06:47, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I support "merge Bushfire to Bushfires in Australia and make Bushfire a redirect to that article" as proposed by Moondyne and endorse his "bit of a dog's breakfast" analysis.--Melburnian (talk) 07:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Bushfire &rarr; Bushfires in Australia ✅. I know I jumped the gun but I'm not gonna have time next week and it seemed like there was enough for a consensus. –Moondyne 13:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hydro-Pyrogoegraphy
On May 5, 2011, Malachy McGreevy contributed a brief paragraph under the sub-category heading "Prevention", relating to the practice of the art of hydro-pyrogeography in wildfire prevention in the wildland-urban interface. Malachymcgreevy (talk) 22:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Globalize
9 out of 16 pictures are from Anglophone countries. Africa, Latin America and Asia are underepresented in the article. Dentren |  Ta lk  17:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add one.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 04:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I have reverted your removal of the banner because it is needed as wikipedia articles are to be described from a wolrdwide view, not one just with examples from Australia, North America and Europe. Dentren  |  Ta lk  18:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed - the problem goes beyond just the use of images. Guettarda (talk) 19:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I just don't think you can back that statement up. A very prominent image of bushfires in Africa heads the opening chapter. There are examples from every continent except Antarctica in the Causes section. Examples from Sumatra, Japan and the Amazon in Fuel. References to Southeast Asia, southern Africa, Mediterranean Europe and the Amazon in Ecology, with a photo from Estonia. Examples from Malaysia, Indonesia and the Bahamas in Plant adaptation. Links to numerous Asian articles in Atmospheric effects, and an estimate of the CO2 release of indonesian fires. Germany, Italy, Spain, Native Americans, central America, the Baltic states and Finland all mentioned in Human involvement. Europe, Southeast Asia, Australian Aborigines and the Phillipines mentioned in Prevention, with a photo from Portugal. Detection is arguably too focused on US agencies and methods, but still includes examples from Europe and a sat photo of the Balkans. European damage costs and Thai extinguishment techniques mentioned in Suppression. The article needs a bit of work, but "world view" is not one of its problems.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 00:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we all can agree on the (obvious) underrepresentation (or rather inexistent representation) of images from Africa, Latin America and Asia (or any that part of the world that is not Australia, Anglo-America and Europe). That's enought to justify the template. Dentren  |  Ta lk  19:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * But it's not a problem with the whole article. Can I suggest that a request for picture template on the talk page might be a better option? -Yeti Hunter (talk) 23:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If the template is put on the article and not in the talk page it think its a better idea since it directly points out what the article is in need for. Dentren  |  Ta lk  16:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a good article with that template. I've sent it for re-assessement here. It should be fixed or delisted. Szzuk (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

It seems that all Dentren cares about is the lack of images from countries where most of our editors don't live and therefore can't easily get pictures. As of today, the list of images includes:


 * Africa (whole continent; satellite image)
 * North America: USA (six), Canada
 * Europe: Estonia, Portugal, Balkans (satellite image)
 * Oceania: Australia
 * Entire world (two maps)

I think that's one entire continent that is largely non-Anglophone, plus multiple European countries that are not even slightly Anglophone. There are already about 15 'location' type images, and nearly all have been chosen because they illustrate a particular concept. This is not an image gallery. It would be silly to replace, say, a clear image of a pyrocumulous cloud from the USA with a bit of smoke from Thailand merely because the useful picture was taken in the "wrong" country.

I do not think this tag is justifiable. I think it's being used as a badge of shame to embarrass other editors into doing what Dentren refuses to do himself (if he actually wanted pictures from other countries, he'd get them himself), and that does not actually need to be done. There is no rule on the English Wikipedia that the images considered in isolation must be geographically balanced. It's the whole article that matters, and the whole article certainly shows a reasonable amount of information about places for which we don't have clear, usable images.

IMO if Dentren wants to fight systemic bias, he would do more good at Talk:Pregnancy by trying to convince the single white males there that Wikipedia could legitimately include at least one image of a non-white pregnant woman, rather than solely light-skinned women in various states of undress. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:37, 4 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Please stay on topic, if WhatamIdoing want to discuss about the topic "Dentren" do so at another place, and avoid empty speeches like "do it your self" which obviously leads nowhere.


 * The are no "wrong" or "right" countries but there regions and forests that this article fails to represent adecuately. In that sence we are speaking about the whole article, if an article about forest fires in Thailand shows only pictures from that country there is no problem but here we have an article with global scope dominated in terms of ilustrations by the countries of the contributors, as WhatamIdoing pointed out. This is not surprise (see WP:BIAS) and it should be dumb to negate this. A problem is a problem no matter if the article has some other good aspecs which it obviouly have as reflected by tis GA status. Dentren  |  Ta lk  14:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Add references from effects of global warming?
99.181.141.52 (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Global warming could lead to more wildfire in California: study June 12, 2012 LA Times
 * Analysis of global fire risk shows big, fast changes ahead June 12, 2012 UC Berkeley
 * Study: Climate change will cause more wildfires Jun 12, 2012 USA Today
 * Climate change will boost number of West's wildfires Jun 12, 2012 Reuters
 * West can expect more fires due to warming, researchers say; 'Speed and extent to which some of these changes may happen is surprising,' says study author via MSNBC
 * Climate change to raise global fire risk June 12, 2012 UPI.com
 * Study: Climate change leaves American West especially vulnerable to wildfires; Colorado snowpack only 2 percent of normal June 12, 2012 The Colorado Independent
 * Climate Change May Spark More Wildfires In Future June 13, 2012 NPR
 * Here is an addition to your list US wildfires are what global warming really looks like, scientists warn; The Colorado fires are being driven by extreme temperatures, which are consistent with IPCC projections 29 June 2012
 * 99.181.139.218 (talk) 18:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Contextual coverage addtion; Media Avoid Climate Context In Wildfire Coverage July 3, 2012 Media Matters for America 99.181.159.96 (talk) 19:21, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

108.195.138.75 (talk) 05:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * US wildfires are what global warming really looks like, scientists warn; The Colorado fires are being driven by extreme temperatures, which are consistent with IPCC projections 29 June 2012, regarding 2012 Colorado wildfires and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
 * Absolutely not, in this article. If it's a reliable source, and not contradicted by other, better, sources, it might fit in one of the commentary on global warming articles (public opinion?  scientific opinion?  We don't seem to a have a "media opinion on global warming"), but it doesn't fit here.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 20:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Why? Doesn't even seem related enough for an external link.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 06:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Combined two related sections. 108.195.136.157 (talk) 07:13, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

list of large wildfires
We have lists of various disasters. There should be one specifically for wildfires. Kdammers (talk) 11:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Term
The term "fire season" is used several times in this article but never makes it clear what that means. This is especially confused when used as "year-round fire season" which would indicate it's not a season at all. Is there a better term that might be used? JMJimmy (talk) 00:07, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Wildfire Containment
The quantitative measurement "percent contained" is frequently used in the media to characterize the state of progress in firefighting a wildfire in the United States. However, it is difficult to find a precise definition. Do you think it would be appropriate to add a section to this article or as an independent article a definition of the quantitative measurement of wildfire containment (e.g., as "Wildfire Containment Percentage" or "Quantifying Wildfire Containment")?


 * I would have thought that an obvious part of any definition is that wildfire that is contained is no longer wildfire. So surely what should be reported is the size of what is still wildfire. HiLo48 (talk) 21:58, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Revisions?
I'm not entirely certain this article, in its present state, is worthy of GA-status. It has a lot of the information to be, but its organization and some of the writing needs to be mopped up. Are there any editors currently watching this article who would like to collaborate on a revision project? JackTheVicar (talk) 17:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I discussed the Tools for Assessing the Impacts of Climate Variability and Change on Wildfire Regimes in Forests because it hadn't mentioned them before in the article. I listed some of the tools that are used. Link: http://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/6/5/1476/htm Marykatherineloos (talk) Marykatherineloos

I discussed the Effects of wildfire disaster exposure on male birth weight in an Australian population because it hadn't been mentioned before. I mentioned how male Australian babies born after high-stress wildfire disasters have a higher average birth weight. Link: http://emph.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/11/15/emph.eov027.abstract?papetoc Marykatherineloos (talk) Marykatherineloos

This sentence was plagiarized with no citation: "Other names such as brush fire, bush fire, forest fire, desert fire, grass fire, hill fire, peat fire, vegetation fire, and veldfire may be used to describe the same phenomenon depending on the type of vegetation being burned, and the regional variant of English being used." I cited the sentence, and then additionally edited it. Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/natural_disasters/forest_fire Marykatherineloos (talk) Marykatherineloos

This sentence was plagiarized with no citation: "Buildings may become involved if a wildfire spreads to adjacent communities. While the causes of wildfires vary and the outcomes are always unique, all wildfires can be characterized in terms of their physical properties, their fuel type, and the effect that weather has on the fire." I cited the sentence, and then additionally edited it. Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/earth/natural_disasters/forest_fire Marykatherineloos (talk) Marykatherineloos

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Wildfire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090619212242/http://www.cbc.ca:80/canada/story/2009/06/17/f-forest-fires.html to http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/17/f-forest-fires.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:54, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

to do- synthesize risk to human health, health risk, epidemiology sections
synthesize Wildfire risk to human health, health risk, epidemiology sections they are repetitive. DerekELee (talk) 16:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

to do -tighten up suppression section
The suppression section of Wildfire is rather long and redundant given there is an entire article on the topic. I propose it be shortened and tightened. DerekELee (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wildfire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080927051047/http://pmr.uoregon.edu/science-and-innovation/uo-research-news/research-news-2008/september-2008/climate-change-human-activity-and-wildfires-1/ to http://pmr.uoregon.edu/science-and-innovation/uo-research-news/research-news-2008/september-2008/climate-change-human-activity-and-wildfires-1/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090514200510/http://www.nifc.gov/fire_policy/pdf/strategy.pdf to http://www.nifc.gov/fire_policy/pdf/strategy.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:23, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Moved US-specific content to a separate article
There were sections dealing with the United States specifically. Since wildfires occur in numerous countries around the world, it didn't make sense to have that much content specific to a single country in the article on the topic in general. So I moved the US-specific sections to a new separate article, Wildfires in the United States. Also, we already have a country-specific article for Australia (Bushfires in Australia), so creating one for the United States as well makes sense. (And also for any other countries for which enough content is contributed.) SJK (talk) 11:01, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Wildfire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090813154949/http://www.ucan.org/energy/electricity/sunrise_powerlink/news_8_investigation_sdg_e_could_be_liable_for_power_line_wildfires to http://www.ucan.org/energy/electricity/sunrise_powerlink/news_8_investigation_sdg_e_could_be_liable_for_power_line_wildfires
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090412054533/http://www.tncfire.org/crosscutting_fandi.htm to http://www.tncfire.org/crosscutting_fandi.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602175115/http://library.csustan.edu/bsantos/section3.htm to http://library.csustan.edu/bsantos/section3.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090710223715/http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561501139/backburn.html to http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561501139/backburn.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081020171425/http://www.smokeybear.com/prescribed-fires.asp to http://www.smokeybear.com/prescribed-fires.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090114111211/http://www.economics.noaa.gov/?goal=ecosystems&file=events%2Ffire%2F to http://www.economics.noaa.gov/?goal=ecosystems&file=events%2Ffire%2F
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090816123809/http://www.westerndisastercenter.org/DOCUMENTS/PERS_PAPER.pdf to http://www.westerndisastercenter.org/DOCUMENTS/PERS_PAPER.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226080558/http://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/org_nws/NWSci%20journal%20articles/1998%20files/Special%20addition%201/v72%20p66%20Alvarado%20et%20al.PDF to http://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/org_nws/NWSci%20journal%20articles/1998%20files/Special%20addition%201/v72%20p66%20Alvarado%20et%20al.PDF
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226080559/http://www.bushfirecrc.com/events/downloads/Forum-report-final-from-printer.pdf to http://www.bushfirecrc.com/events/downloads/Forum-report-final-from-printer.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325095126/https://www.firelab.utoronto.ca/pubs/2008_martell_sun.pdf to https://www.firelab.utoronto.ca/pubs/2008_martell_sun.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080917201358/http://www.nifc.gov/preved/comm_guide/wildfire/FILES/PDF%20%20FILES/Linked%20PDFs/2%20Wildland%20fire%20overview.PDF to http://www.nifc.gov/preved/comm_guide/wildfire/FILES/PDF%20%20FILES/Linked%20PDFs/2%20Wildland%20fire%20overview.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Wildfire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325095123/https://www.firelab.utoronto.ca/pubs/2005_flannigan_wotton_etal.pdf to https://www.firelab.utoronto.ca/pubs/2005_flannigan_wotton_etal.pdf
 * Added tag to http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1890/1540-9295(2006)4
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090813162512/http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F11%2F16%2Fapworld%2F20061116114312&sec=apworld to http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F11%2F16%2Fapworld%2F20061116114312&sec=apworld
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090411124535/http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010 to http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2010
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404124819/http://firecenter.umt.edu/index.php/project/Wireless-Weather-Sensor-Networks-for-Fire-Management/ID/461d72ad/fuseaction/whatWeDo.projectDetail.htm to http://firecenter.umt.edu/index.php/project/Wireless-Weather-Sensor-Networks-for-Fire-Management/ID/461d72ad/fuseaction/whatWeDo.projectDetail.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130218072405/http://oeapp.oregonexplorer.info/Wildfire/topics/topics.aspx?Res=16142 to http://oeapp.oregonexplorer.info/Wildfire/topics/topics.aspx?Res=16142
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515025527/http://www.coagbushfireenquiry.gov.au/subs_pdf/47_2_edwards_firewatch_tech_desc.pdf to http://www.coagbushfireenquiry.gov.au/subs_pdf/47_2_edwards_firewatch_tech_desc.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226080558/http://fire.feric.ca/36152002/EvaluationOfThreeWildfireSmokeDetectionSystem.pdf to http://fire.feric.ca/36152002/EvaluationOfThreeWildfireSmokeDetectionSystem.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226080606/http://www.firemodels.org/downloads/farsite/publications/fireareaall.pdf to http://www.firemodels.org/downloads/farsite/publications/fireareaall.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080722125603/http://www.bushfire.nsw.gov.au/file_system/attachments/State08/Attachment_20050308_44889DFD.pdf to http://www.bushfire.nsw.gov.au/file_system/attachments/State08/Attachment_20050308_44889DFD.pdf
 * Added tag to http://grvc.us.es/publica/revistas/documentos/R-050.05ActiveFire.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:05, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Contradictory statement
The first sentence under Causes contradicts itself:

"Four major natural causes of wildfire ignitions exist: 2A02:587:5C08:D300:8CC7:3E6:901B:40C6 (talk) 09:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * lightning
 * spontaneous combustion
 * volcanic eruption"


 * Good find. I have fixed it. Next time you find something like that, feel free to fix it yourself. HiLo48 (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Prospect Hill bushfire.jpg

“Climate Fires” new term
Washington’s Governor, Jay Inslee, in news coverage today, is going to start calling wild fires “climate fires” to be more accurate. Not sure how to add to this article, and dialed in on iPad so editing is not easy. Anyone reading this, Can you help me update as appropriate? Don’t have citation but it’s across the news today from Gov Inslee Press Conference. DrMel (talk) 01:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Doubts about this article—is it GA quality?
Although there is a long section on "suppression", there does not seem to be any mention about the harmful effects of suppression. The prevention section also lacks information on the harms of overzealous suppression in terms of leading to fuel buildup -> more and worse fires. I see other issues such as uncited info in places. (t · c)  buidhe  09:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Yes, Buidhe, I came here to say this as well. The costs of fire suppression, both monetarily, culturally (for Indigenous peoples in the American West), and in terms of fire damage are enormous and well-documented. While climate change is very much to blame, fire suppression has also played a big role in the recent over proliferation of fire in the American West. Also, the page’s section on prescribed burns should be expanded in light of this, as many governmental organizations are now working with tribes such as the Karuk in Northern California so that Indigenous fire practices are implemented instead of suppression. Some sources for this in addition to what you have provided:    Hobomok (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Apologies for the double-post here, but I may try to begin adding some of these sources to the suppression section/prescribed burn sections today, if I can manage to get some of my own writing revised beforehand. If anyone would like to help/has any suggestions, please feel free to join in discussion. Hobomok (talk) 15:56, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Marykatherineloos.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nelsosam1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Sophie007007.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2020 and 18 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aaishwar.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Should climate change be listed under causes?
I think the section of causes, human activities, ought to make a reference to climate change. It's the human activities that have resulted in increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere and hence higher temperatures which in itself has increased the risks of wildfire (see e.g. Australia as an example). The article does have a section on the effects of climate change later but does not mention it yet under causes. EMsmile (talk) 09:03, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Improved global map of fires
Noticed the WRI-sponsored Global Forest Watch site provides detailed daily updates on fire alerts. This will be useful to readers. Have enquired if WRI will release a screen dump to Wikipedia. ASRASR (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * WRI has responded positively. Their GFW site has a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license. Suggesting to update the present graphic which is from 2008 with this one which is a screen dump from April 13, 2021 [[File:Global map of fire alerts April 13, 2021 screen dump from Global Forest Watch website.png|thumb|Global map of fire alerts on April 13, 2021. Available from https://www.globalforestwatch.org/topics/fires/#footer]] ASRASR (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, what is the status of this now? EMsmile (talk) 09:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The new graphic was added back in April 2021. The one from 2008 was not removed. ASRASR (talk) 15:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Plant Ecology Winter 2023
— Assignment last updated by Zawraksa (talk) 03:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Need elaboration for the following wordings
"Prevention techniques aim to manage air quality, maintain ecological balances, protect resources, and to affect future fires.[145]"; " Alteration of fuels is commonly undertaken when attempting to affect future fire risk and behavior.[37] ". I'm wondering how the "future fires" can be affected, and "what alteration of fuels" really means. Thanks in advance for anybody who can help. ThomasYehYeh (talk) 02:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Being a book, I cannot look at that source, but here in Australia it is recognised that burning encourages the longer term growth of certain plants and tends to eliminate the most fire prone. Even species that thrive may actually be killed by fire but their seeds do well in a post fire environment. HiLo48 (talk) 03:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I would say, more simply, if you burn off alot of the lighter fuels (small vegetation, brush, dead leaves, etc.) ie the "alteration of fuels", there's less to burn in the next fire, ie "affect future fire risk and behavior". Burning on a regular cycle reduces the fuel buildup that leads to large conflagrations. Crescent77 (talk) 08:17, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

A suggestion to remove or move the pollution sidebar
My suggestion is to remove the pollution sidebar which is currently in the lead, or to move it to further down in the article. I have some concerns about this because I feel that this pollution sidebar has been added to too many articles. It's a very large sidebar and takes up a lot of space and reader attention. I find it quite distracting and a bit annoying, especially when sections are expanded. I would suggest to only have it on articles that are clearly about pollution directly (such as water pollution), not for articles where the connection is indirect. I've also written about it here. EMsmile (talk) 08:17, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: I have removed this sidebar now. EMsmile (talk) 13:04, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Do we really need so many photos from the United States here?
This article has a lot of similar wildfire photos from the United States, do we really need this additional one that was added today by User:WriterArtistCoder? I don't think the caption is very precise either. And it seems like a small fire, hardly worth mentioning. Is brush fire really a word or should it be bush fire? More broadly, I think we should consider culling some of the images from the U.S. and replace them with images from other countries to give this a balanced global view. Note there is also wildfires in the United States where some could be moved to. EMsmile (talk) 22:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * update: this image has been removed in the meantime and the spread of images from different parts of the world has been improved. EMsmile (talk) 13:08, 5 July 2023 (UTC)