![]() | 1988 Armenian earthquake has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
September 29, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that 35 days after the December
1988 Spitak earthquake, six people were rescued alive from a collapsed building? | |||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on December 7, 2007, December 7, 2008, December 7, 2009, December 7, 2012, December 7, 2013, December 7, 2016, December 7, 2018, and December 7, 2023. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
should it be noted that the soviet media initially reported "no distructions or casualties"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.189.58.173 ( talk) 04:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
In the article for the year 1988, it states the amount of lives lost was nearly 25,000. In this article, it states that it was 50,000. This is a shockingly unreliable trend. Which is correct? It needs changing. It might also be wise to check other articles on this earthquake too. Lra drama 18:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Can it be said that the earthquake and the aftermath, like Chernobyl two years previously, meant that the USSR had to make concessions in its domestic policy? Would it be interesting or worthy of the article to suggest that the international community had to support Soviet relief efforts and that this led to the need for greater openness in general? Finding contemporary sources might be problematic but doubtless some historian or other could come up with a plausible connection between the need for the international community to help and thus the exposure of the shortcomings of the Soviet system in providing for people within the disaster area. It needn't be POV as long as it was handled sensitively but the fallout of the earthquake had larger repercussions for the USSR as a whole than, say, similar disasters in Soviet Central Asia in the 1960s which were hushed up successfully.
I have Russian friends who say it was well-understood at the time that the USSR could not cope with the scale of the disaster, and having to accept humanitarian aid from the West meant that serious flaws were exposed; they cite it as one of the pivotal events in the ending of Communism on a par with the Chernobyl disaster of 1986. (I even have a book from 1977 - on the subject of "omens" and prophecies - that includes the idea "the return of Halley's Comet will mark the ending of Russia's quest for world domination". When Halley's Comet was at its perihelion in 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded, thus precipitating glasnost, perestroika and the events leading to the fall of communism. I have read a lot of these kind of things and always doubted until coming across just such a concrete example...) Lstanley1979 ( talk) 21:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I changed the magnitude scale that was used in the infobox as no one knows what the numbers on the soviet scale represent, and it is probably more of an intensity scale than magnitude. RapidR ( talk) 03:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
The info box has 2 magnitude scales - surface wave and local(richter) magnitudes. There is no reference for this, so I added a citation needed note. None of the references say which scale is used (just earthquake of magnitude x, apart from the BBC but they are not reliable on seismological matters). Part of the article mentioned it being on the richter scale, but as the citations don't say it is Richter scale, I changed it to just say 'magnitude.' In fact the info box says the richter magnitude is 7.2 (without reference) whereas the 6.9 apparaently refers to surface wave magnitude.
There are many magnitude scales, of which richter (local, or ML) is just one and hasn't been commonly used for several decades. So we still need to find out which scale is referred to in the article, and find proper references 130.209.6.40 ( talk) 11:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
A large part of this article is copypasted from this website. Is this allowed in the English sector of the Wikipedia? I'm not sure about your rules. BadaBoom ( talk) 12:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The New York Times article that supports the Aftermath section does mention a fellow by the name of Pierre Schaeffer, but is this really the well-known musician? At the time of the earthquake "our" Pierre Schaeffer would have been 78 and leading a rescue team, several hundred strong, into an earthquake ravaged country? Dawnseeker2000 03:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Secret ( talk · contribs) 01:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this within the next few days. Thanks
Secret
account
01:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Reviewing....
Done Removed "exceptionally" and damaged
Dawnseeker2000
04:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Done Removed "one-off" and included the link to Rock Aid Armenia, along with a bit of supporting text. I think that when I originally wrote that I didn't want to give too much away in the lead because there's only one sentence in the body on the topic
Dawnseeker2000
04:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
I have a feeling that the year may have been available in the text of the source article, but I no longer have access to the HighBeam Research articles that were used heavily in creating this one, so I won't be able to go back and double check on those
Dawnseeker2000
04:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Done Found a source that says it was re-opened in 1995.
Étienne Dolet (
talk)
08:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Done Removed "in several locations"
Dawnseeker2000
04:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
The material here summarizes the source at the end of the paragraph, and is a journal article from the
American Society of Civil Engineers. I believe they don't specify where because they're looking at all available studies of liquefaction. Here's a portion of the source: "While there is an abundance of case histories involving liquefaction of sands, there have been a very few field observations of liquefaction of gravels and gravelly sands (Liao 1986)." and "There are several noteworthy case histories, as discussed by Harder and Seed (1986) and Evans et al. (1992) in which liquefaction of gravels and gravelly soils have occurred."
Dawnseeker2000
04:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Done
Étienne Dolet (
talk)
08:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Done
Étienne Dolet (
talk)
08:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
My main concern is the citations and maybe another copyedit. I'll place this on hold for a week. Thanks Secret account 19:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Ok passing Secret account 16:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was moved. -- BDD ( talk) 18:53, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
1988 Spitak earthquake → 1988 Armenian earthquake – WP:COMMONNAME Երևանցի talk 03:33, 7 March 2014 (UTC) In Armenian, yes, it is known as the Spitak earthquake, but more English sources use "1988 Armenian earthquake" than "1988 Spitak earthquake" as clearly shown by Google Books:
I see that this article has already passed as a GA, but there are a number of things I want to point out that should be added to the article:
-- Երևանցի talk 04:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
The article lacks basic information in the introductory paragraph: edit: I see someone added the death toll. Seems to me this article still doesn't give the full perspective one would expect in an encyclopedia Also, this sentence "....with a surface wave magnitude of 6.8 and a maximum MSK intensity of X (Devastating)" may be confusing, even if true. How is 6.8 = to "devastating?" I'm wondering if that's a contradiction or not?? ---- Chris874664 ( talk) 01:23, 31 May 2017 (UTC)-- 05:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)