This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
In the introduction of the article, it reads that "throughout the Caribbean, at least 5 people have been killed as a result of Matthew." However, the only true reference relating to direct casualties caused by the storm can be found under the Impact paragraph, stating that Matthew killed at least 7 people in Venezuela. I'm not sure if we can consider the coastlines to be a part of the Caribbean, but there is no viable source or citation provided that confirms the deaths of at least those 5 people (throughout the Caribbean) regardless. Now then, where did the aforementioned Caribbean death toll magically appear from, and where were those people killed? — Hylian Auree (talk) 00:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think those 5 deaths were referring to the Haiti storm casualties, which turned out to not be related to Matthew whatsoever.
I'm not so sure those deaths in Haiti were related to Matthew. Sure, one news agency says it was, but there are plenty that don't mention the connection with Matthew. Think of it - on Friday afternoon, Matthew was several hundred miles away from the country and was about to move ashore. It could've been the storm east of Matthew (that some folks are saying will become the dominant storm in a few days). Just check out the wording from CNN.
"A short but severe storm with high winds and heavy rain has killed at least five people in Haiti's earthquake-devastated capital, the United Nations said. No warnings were issued because the storm Friday afternoon was not predicted."
I'd rather err on the side of caution and wait until a more reliable source confirms the deaths in Haiti were indeed from Matthew, than inflate Matthew's death toll to more than it really is. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And there we have it, I found a source that pretty much agrees with what I said, that "Friday's storm did not appear to be directly related to this year's highly active Atlantic hurricane season or Tropical Storm Matthew, which hit Nicaragua's Atlantic coast on Friday afternoon."
It is possible it is related to now-TD16 though, but definitely not Matthew. CrazyC83 (talk) 15:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another source. It could be that the rains were related to the broad monsoon system that spawned Matthew, but when Nicole forms could we include the Haiti deaths as indirect in her article? ~AH1(TCU) 21:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok...this is getting confusing. I've been finding extreme variations in the human toll from the Oaxaca landslide. Currently, they range from zero to 2,000; I'm clueless as to what's going on there. Can anyone shed some light on this? Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as the landslide didn't cause the number of deaths they thought it did, it was caused by Matthew, and that the landslide article is rather short, I propose that article be merged here. Hurricanehink (talk) 05:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The landslide article does not really has a source that it indeed was caused by Matthew – the area is insaturated since EPac's Agatha, was showered on again by TD 10-E and again by Karl. I don't know if Matthew is to blame for that. Aside from that the landslide article is a nice piece of recentism which was not updated at all. --Matthiasb (talk) 10:52, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Although the landslide article doesn't have a source that says Matthew caused it, there are available sources that are not in that articles (mainly since it hasn't been updated) that state Matthew was the trigger for the landslide. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 12:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a quick source I found that links Matthew w/ the landslide. It's clear the other storms contributed to the wet conditions, but it appears Matthew was the straw that broke the camel's back. --Hurricanehink (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but sometimes such sources are wrong or are misinterpretated, like f.ex. in this case. --Matthiasb (talk) 16:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sort of on board with this. The current Oaxaca landslide article is pretty much on the verge of being a stub, so it would be convenient to merge it with this article. However, the article on the landslide alone contains a bit too much information for a single section in my opinion, especially since this article is relatively short. If the landslide indeed turned out to be not that much of a disaster and information can be shortened considerably without omitting any important parts, you have my vote; if not, I feel it should have its own article. Hylian Auree (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since the landslide article is still a stub, I'm all for merging it if it can be proved to have been caused by Matthew.Hylian Auree (talk) 03:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it could be merged with the article, but Matthew didn't cause the landslide alone; the ground was formerly saturated by Karl, so Matthew was able to cause a lot of damage there. If two or more storms lead to a disaster in an area, not all of it can be blamed on one of them, because Matthew had help from Karl to be this bad; it didn't do it by itself. If no one else wants the landslide article itself to be a stub, feel free to merge it with the main article. Rye998 (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a conclusion with this discussion yet? Will the landslide article be merged or not? If it isn't, then the tag in the article should be dropped. Rye998 (talk) 03:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think there's enough consensus to merge it, so I did so. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 9 external links on Tropical Storm Matthew (2010). 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 trueorfailed 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 12 external links on Tropical Storm Matthew (2010). 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.
I have just modified one external link on Tropical Storm Matthew (2010). 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.
