|
|
||
(10 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{talkheader}} |
{{talkheader}} |
||
{{ITN talk|19 December|2023|oldid=1190778392}} |
{{ITN talk|19 December|2023|oldid=1190778392}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell| |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C| |
||
{{WikiProject Disaster management |
{{WikiProject Disaster management |importance=Low}} |
||
{{WikiProject Earthquakes |
{{WikiProject Earthquakes |importance=Low}} |
||
{{WikiProject Iceland |
{{WikiProject Iceland |importance=High}} |
||
{{WikiProject Volcanoes |
{{WikiProject Volcanoes |importance=Low}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] --> |
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] --> |
||
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div> |
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div> |
||
== [[:File: |
== [[:File:Protective barrier at Svartsengi.png]] doesn't cite sources, appears to be [[WP:OR|OR]] == |
||
[[File: |
[[File:Protective barrier at Svartsengi.png|thumb|This is a preliminary plan for the protective barrier intended to shield the Blue Lagoon and Svartsengi Power Station.]] |
||
The file currently in {{slink|2023 Iceland earthquakes|Barrier construction|nopage=y}} doesn't cite any sources and appears to be OR. I've also scanned the references in the paragraph and the ones following it, and I can't find any descriptions for the layout of the image created. But I'm happy if someone proves my reference analysis wrong, please {{tl|ping}} me. |
The file currently in {{slink|2023 Iceland earthquakes|Barrier construction|nopage=y}} doesn't cite any sources and appears to be OR. I've also scanned the references in the paragraph and the ones following it, and I can't find any descriptions for the layout of the image created. But I'm happy if someone proves my reference analysis wrong, please {{tl|ping}} me. |
||
Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
== Sundhnúkur is NOT a crater row == |
== Sundhnúkur is NOT a crater row == |
||
{{Ping|HurricaneEdgar}} The introduction days:『Sundhnúkur is a crater row and currently active volcanic fissure...』This is wrong. Sundhnúkur is a gentle peak (elevation 134m) north of Hagafell, and not far from Sundhnúkur to the north, a crater row called『Sundhnúkagígaröðin』(Sundhnúkur crater row) starts, trending in NNE direction past Stóra-Skógfell. Check out https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1222844626 |
{{Ping|HurricaneEdgar}} {{Ping|Borgenland}} {{Ping|Alvaldi}} {{Ping|Askeuhd}} The introduction days:『Sundhnúkur is a crater row and currently active volcanic fissure...』This is wrong. Sundhnúkur is a gentle peak (elevation 134m) north of Hagafell, and not far from Sundhnúkur to the north, a crater row called『Sundhnúkagígaröðin』(Sundhnúkur crater row) starts, trending in NNE direction past Stóra-Skógfell. Check out https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1222844626 |
||
It's the same problem as with Litli-Hrútur, a hill close to the previous eruption (but not Litli-Hrútur itself erupted, just a previously unnamed spot in a plain nearby). --[[User:Kuhni74|Kuhni74]] ([[User talk:Kuhni74|talk]]) 19:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
It's the same problem as with Litli-Hrútur, a hill close to the previous eruption (but not Litli-Hrútur itself erupted, just a previously unnamed spot in a plain nearby). --[[User:Kuhni74|Kuhni74]] ([[User talk:Kuhni74|talk]]) 19:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC) |
||
: {{done}} by [[User:Prioryman]] in Feb 2024. --[[User:Kuhni74|Kuhni74]] ([[User talk:Kuhni74|talk]]) 07:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:They were still referred to as Sundhnúkar. I changed it again. [[User:Steinninn|Steinn]][[User talk:Steinninn|inn]] 22:01, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Notability of the misinformation == |
== Notability of the misinformation == |
||
I wish to ask how far did the false claims spread? Because if the claims did not spread as far as the COVID-19/5G claims, then I am not sure if we should keep the section there. --[[User:Minoa|<span style="color:#00A4E0">Minoa</span>]] <small>([[User_talk:Minoa|talk]])</small> 18:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC) |
I wish to ask how far did the false claims spread? Because if the claims did not spread as far as the COVID-19/5G claims, then I am not sure if we should keep the section there. --[[User:Minoa|<span style="color:#00A4E0">Minoa</span>]] <small>([[User_talk:Minoa|talk]])</small> 18:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC) |
||
:Agreed, @[[User:Minoa|Minoa]], I don't think it needs to be there. Is a re-telling of an inaccurate climate-change-denial talking point relevant to mention on the page for every volcanic eruption on earth? Every volcanic eruption that makes major news websites will have at least one random social media comment repeating this misinformation. In almost every case, some fact-checking website will write an easy article, or we could reference one of the many existing sites which refute this misinformation in the general case, and then we'll have a duplicate, irrelevant "misinformation" section on the wikipedia article for every notable volcanic eruption. The reported misinformation is not about this eruption, it's about all volcanic eruptions. Unless the prevelance of the misinformation, or the harm casued by it, is notable in the specific case of the particular eruption, I don't see what it adds to the article. [[User:Akkadrowe|Akkadrowe]] ([[User talk:Akkadrowe|talk]]) 00:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Eruption has started again == |
|||
The Sundahnúkar system has started erupting again [https://www.ruv.is/english/2024-01-14-an-eruption-has-begun-north-of-grindavik-401887]. The content and the name of the article should probably be updated accordingly. Perhabs 2023-2024 Sundhnúkur eruption? [[User:Alvaldi|Alvaldi]] ([[User talk:Alvaldi|talk]]) 10:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Circumstances missing presumed dead == |
|||
The unfortunate missing presumed death was not an event of 13th as first reports much earlier this week so I have deleted sentence. Incident mentioned elsewhere on page with another earlier date. Can I suggest even this date needs verification as I am aware of Icelandic English language sources that say incident was unwitnessed.[[User:ChaseKiwi|ChaseKiwi]] ([[User talk:ChaseKiwi|talk]]) 23:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Significantly == |
|||
Article uses this term a fair bit and it seems to be multiplying. Often used loosely by popular news sources or even some science communicators to imply scientific credibility to a statement when none exists. Should article not be worked through to see if its a weasel word in context or if alternatives would read better as three or four significantly in about 50 words does not read well, especially when some statements quote numbers but the inline references used give no hint of statistical testing ? [[User:ChaseKiwi|ChaseKiwi]] ([[User talk:ChaseKiwi|talk]]) 07:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC) |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2023–2024 Sundhnúkur eruptions article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving 2023–2024 Sundhnúkur eruptions was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 December 2023. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 19 December 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from 2023 Iceland earthquakesto2023 Sundhnúkur eruption. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This series appears to be closely related to volcanic activity. Should this be merged into a possible eruption article or do we continue to integrate volcanism into this? Borgenland (talk) 12:13, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the Icelandic Met Office treating its updates in a news thread approach the authors updating this item have got into an archive issue on ref. 1. I count 8 updates since the archive date of 11th November and note multiple use of reference postdating 11th November. The url-status=live has not sorted this out. The active authors (good on you) could see if a manual update of access-date in the reference will work on next significant update of article using this source to get the archive bots to do a fresh job. ChaseKiwi (talk) 16:52, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are other iceland earthquakes in 2023 eg [1] If it is only about Reykjanes Peninsula shouldn't that be in title? C-randles (talk) 23:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My proposal as a title would be something like "Winter 2023 volcano-tectonic episode on Reykjanes Peninsula, Iceland" (because the summer 2023 erupton at Fagradalsfjall was also a volcano-tectonic episode located on the same peninsula in the south-west of Iceland.Hornstrandir1 (talk) 15:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the move request was: moved. WP:SNOW. (closed by non-admin page mover) Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️⚧️) 01:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2023 Iceland earthquakes → 2023 Sundhnúkur eruption – Sources:
[2][3][4][5] These sources are trusted. Maybe a change of name? CostalCal (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
References
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The file currently in § Barrier construction doesn't cite any sources and appears to be OR. I've also scanned the references in the paragraph and the ones following it, and I can't find any descriptions for the layout of the image created. But I'm happy if someone proves my reference analysis wrong, please {{ping}} me.
I want to be clear that I'm not commenting on the quality of the image, I'm okay with accurate and verifiable info being presented as is, and although it would be nice with a better quality image, the quality isn't my concern and was not the basis for my challenge.
I've commented out the image from the section and placed a direction to the talk page here. microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 14:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why was the eruption section removed with all the important details???? Now we’re left with the earthquake section which would make this title moot. Borgenland (talk) 02:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneEdgar: @Borgenland: @Alvaldi: @Askeuhd: The introduction days:『Sundhnúkur is a crater row and currently active volcanic fissure...』This is wrong. Sundhnúkur is a gentle peak (elevation 134m) north of Hagafell, and not far from Sundhnúkur to the north, a crater row called『Sundhnúkagígaröðin』(Sundhnúkur crater row) starts, trending in NNE direction past Stóra-Skógfell. Check out https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1222844626
It's the same problem as with Litli-Hrútur, a hill close to the previous eruption (but not Litli-Hrútur itself erupted, just a previously unnamed spot in a plain nearby). --Kuhni74 (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to ask how far did the false claims spread? Because if the claims did not spread as far as the COVID-19/5G claims, then I am not sure if we should keep the section there. --Minoa (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Sundahnúkar system has started erupting again [7]. The content and the name of the article should probably be updated accordingly. Perhabs 2023-2024 Sundhnúkur eruption? Alvaldi (talk) 10:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The unfortunate missing presumed death was not an event of 13th as first reports much earlier this week so I have deleted sentence. Incident mentioned elsewhere on page with another earlier date. Can I suggest even this date needs verification as I am aware of Icelandic English language sources that say incident was unwitnessed.ChaseKiwi (talk) 23:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article uses this term a fair bit and it seems to be multiplying. Often used loosely by popular news sources or even some science communicators to imply scientific credibility to a statement when none exists. Should article not be worked through to see if its a weasel word in context or if alternatives would read better as three or four significantly in about 50 words does not read well, especially when some statements quote numbers but the inline references used give no hint of statistical testing ? ChaseKiwi (talk) 07:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]