This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
earthquakes,
seismology,
plate tectonics, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the
project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to
participate, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project, participate in
relevant discussions, and see
lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 08:50, August 2, 2024 (
JST,
Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
April 2011 Miyagi earthquake was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the
good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be
renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
As this earthquake is an aftershock of the March 11 earthquake I don't think it should have a page on it's own, especially since that, even if it's the stronger aftershock until now, it's not the only M>7 aftershock of this earthquake.
Luinil (
talk)
02:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The 2011 Miaygi earthquake is the 11 March quake. That quake occurred off Miyagi. Some news sources even called it the Miaygi quake, this article is therefore badly named.
65.93.12.101 (
talk)
06:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I agree, this should be a redirect for now at least. We could reconsider if its coverage gets so extensive it would have undue weight there. --
Avenue (
talk)
10:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Personally, I think this quake was significant enough to stand on its own, aftershock or not. I'm not too familiar with the consensus for quake articles, but I've expanded the article and I think it's pretty solid now. Besides, the quake got much more media attention than the other aftershocks, and had a much larger impact and degree of concern. I agree that the current article title is not the best choice, however.
★ Auree (
talk)
00:54, 10 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Whatever gets decided regarding merge/name, will likely also apply to
2011 Fukushima earthquake, another aftershock stub. I made it only because there needs to be some place to put the information about it until it is decided where it will go.
Once again, are there any objections to pasting this whole thread to the discussion area below? After all, these are two concurrent discussions about the same thing.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk)
09:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Requested move
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
That wouldn't work, since it's an aftershock (afterquake? I haven't seen that term being used on this quake) and there's been hundreds of them, two larger than this one, many in the 6.x range.
65.93.12.101 (
talk)
18:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Comment it does link directly to it, since the current title should properly redirect to the Tohoku article as an alternate name that has been used in some sources for that quake. That quake occurred of Kesennuma, Miyagi, Tohoku, Japan.
WP:PRECISION also has something to say about long titles.
65.93.12.101 (
talk)
05:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Discussion
Any additional comments:
Whatever gets decided regarding merge/name, will likely also apply to
2011 Fukushima earthquake, another aftershock stub. I made it only because there needs to be some place to put the information about it until it is decided where it will go.
Once again, are there any objections to pasting the whole thread above to this discussion area here? After all, these are two concurrent discussions about the same thing.
Anna Frodesiak (
talk)
09:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)reply
That (2011 Fukushima) article was merged to the list of aftershocks. Still, regardless of if this article is merged or not, the current title should redirect to the main article (2011 Sendai/Tohoku) since this name is used for that quake as well.
65.93.12.101 (
talk)
23:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The article is reasonably well-written, but there are a lot of things that could be improved, for example in the lead "No major damage was reported" -> "there was no major damage" (if true). Enough time should have passed to know if there was major damage or not. Also the prose should be changed to past form: "are confirmed dead" -> "were confirmed dead", etc (it's no longer a current event). "All warnings and alerts were canceled within 90 minutes, however" should probably be changed to something like "Within 90 minutes, all warnings were canceled, and no tsunami occurred" (if true; I think it's much more important whether a tsunami did arrive or not than the cancellation of warnings). I think the "earthquake" and "effects" chapters should be split into subchapters - there is currently too much diverse information in these chapters for a good flow. The subchapter addition should be combined with expansion, see below.
It's a quite short article, I think too short for GA. Some suggestions for expansion: 1) more specific information about the damage, 2) where exactly and how the other 3 victims died, 3) where were the 5 coal plants located, 4) reactions by officials and scientists to the quake, etc.
There is only one image (the map). I think we should at least have relevant photograph, for example of the damage done by the quake (although it can be difficult the separate the aftershock damage from the main quake damage).
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Currently the article does cover the main facts, but just doesn't seem to have enough information yet for a GA. It's easy think of material that could be added and should reasonably be in the article. The article also definitely needs a relevant photograph (I think it should be possible to get one).
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
April 2011 Miyagi earthquake. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified one external link on
April 2011 Miyagi earthquake. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.