 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
"More than 5 Army and Air National Guardsmen and 7,200 active-duty troops were stationed in the Gulf Coast region to assist with hurricane relief operations with some remaining several weeks." What exactly does "5 Army and Air National Guardsmen" mean? I imagine there should be digits after the 5. --204.52.215.71 06:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would vote no to that. It is good to have a summary in one article and a detailed list in another. Both articles will (most likely) be extensive; if merged, too much important information would be lost. --Tsaddik Dervish 21:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No for reasons cited above. --Dpr 22:30, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No for reasons cited by Tsaddik Dervish. --CFIF 22:32, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
No, two articles are taking shape. As can be seen, they are quite different. --Vsion 22:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, I agree with the statements above, however, there should be a clearer reference to the related articles in the seperate articles themselves. --Shadowfax0 0:44, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
No, sounded like an excellent idea, but looking at the articles shows that they are quite different. The correct title to the other article is Hurricane Katrina disaster relief. DDerby | Talk 02:51, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest moving to Humanitarian response to Hurricane Katrina (like Humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake). -- Ian ≡ talk 03:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC) Retracting proposal as I've rethought it through. -- Ian ≡ talk 04:15, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
EMC was listed in the article as being a donor... but the provided link doesn't really say that. I couldn't find a source. Can someone provide a better link and put it back if it is correct?
--24.165.233.150 23:43, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have clarified the disaster declaration by George Bush - the parishes designated on the 27th are shaded in this gif - [2], which I characterized as "inland." I gave counts for the counties in Mississippi and Alabama. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:09, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Devastating firsthand account: "Get Off the Fucking Freeway: The Sinking State Loots its Own Survivors," Guerilla News Network
Well I'm a Civil Air Patrol member and we haven't gotten recognized to say we helped. Why? We did a good duty out there. [Even though i wasn't there] we searched for missing people and gathered food for the victims. Well if you didn't know ask the members of CAP and you will see.
I fixed your grammar. That is not representative of CAP and does not belong on Wikipedia. Also, please remember to sign your posts.
![[2]](http://www.fema.gov/graphics/diz05/t_dec_3212.gif){kind=link}
Football1607 (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This article is a mess. I'm just passing through to fix a link, but someone needs to take this one and do some major work. Pjbflynn 04:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So there is a line that states the "Red Cross received a significant amount of criticism from the public, media and the government for its response", however the only source is that of a CharityNavigator blog. Even the actual blog article (not just the linked teaser) seems to have more praise than criticism (and the comments give further proof). I am certainly not one to say that the Red Cross was anywhere near perfect during Katrina, but this line needs to be re-worked - it simply isn't that drastic (as compared to the Bush/Blanco/Nagin fiasco). [ed] (talk) 04:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article certainly is a mess. From a grammar standpoint, all the stuff written in the present tense should be rewritten to be in the past tense. I just removed this paragraph that made no sense to me; if the author would like to clarify it and cite a source then feel free do so:
Tempshill (talk) 16:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just removed one promotional mention from this section, and notice that it's largely unsourced, and is being used to promote numerous organizations, often with links only to their websites. JNW (talk) 02:57, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There was an unneeded sentence in the Coast Guard section. "With 39,500 active duty members, the coast guard is tiny- but very effective." Even though that is true, it is an unneeded piece of information for this page. Please try to remember that Wikipedia articles should not contain any unnecessary information. Football1607 (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Hurricane Katrina disaster relief. 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Hurricane Katrina disaster relief. 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Hurricane Katrina disaster relief. 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:
{{dead link}} tag to http://www.lcms.org/pages/rpage.asp?NavID=10814When 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article was written by someone working for the Army Public Affairs Office. It makes it seem as though it was DOD units who did most of the rescue work.
Truth. The U.S. Coast Guard was the first military service to fly into New Orleans and did so by flying into wind speeds the other service refuse to fly in. The Coast Guard pulled aviation and ground units from around the country - including helicopters from Alaska. The Coast Guard accounted for the rescues of 35,000 people - approximately half of all rescues made. 2600:6C63:417E:81A2:D9E8:E1E9:862F:BE01 (talk) 23:45, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
