Talk:Earthquake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Earthquake is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster Management.

[edit] Official earthquake information

Where should we go for official information on earthquakes? I've only seen references to the United States Geological Survey. I didn't see even that in this article, except in a caption for a picture, and in the external links. [[User:Brianjd|Brian j d]] 07:41, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)

I was going to set raw signature first thing today... 07:42, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)

Is the signature right now? Brian j d 07:43, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)

[edit] Old talk - no headings

I came across your page and noted quite a few inaccuracies and, I'm afraid, a few things that were plain wrong (for example, suggesting that earthquake intensity is associated with the Richter scale, and reference to "seaquakes", a term I've never heard in thirty years as a professional seismologist). So I've tidied it up quickly. I don't think there's anything in the present page that any of my colleagues would argue with -- and they are folk who are only too happy to pick up a good argument -- but there's plenty more that could usefully be added to the page. The long-running debate on the extent to which earthquakes might be predicted, for a start!

Russ

Thanks for being bold! feel free to edit other articles you think needs some work. There are apparently not many professional seismologist editing so your additions are highly important, take a look also, at the article about Seismology, it's currently a stub (only a beginning of an article) so much further work is needed on this field! -- Rotem Dan 13:56 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Suggestion: We were just wondering if you could add something mentioning about how long significant aftershocks will occur after a mainquake. Thanks : )

kl;

-- Aftershock is a really loose term.

[edit] Pulled from the article

This is sort of written like breaking news and doesn't really fit with the list of earthquakes info very well:

[edit] Two other earthquakes

Bam, Tehran Earthquake (2003) Tehran city earthquake of 9 March 2003 at 22:50:23 (GMT) a moderate earthquake, M=4.1 (IGTU) struck north east of Tehran. Its epicenter has been estimated at 35.74N and 51.46E (IGTU) up to now,the following stations have recorded the strong motion due to this event: Abbasspur University, Jamshidiyeh Park, Ministry of Agriculture (20Th floor), among which the maximum acceleration is 0.055g.

Northern Iran earthquake magnitude 6.3, 2004 28 May 12:38:46 UTC, Preliminary Earthquake Report, U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center, World Data Center for Seismology, Denver, A strong earthquake occurred at 12:38:46 (UTC) on Friday, 28 May 2004. The magnitude 6.3 event has been located in Northern Iran.

I linked the Bam earthquake in the list of earthquakes but the other probably doesn't make the cut as far as prominent quakes go. Don't want to lose this info however since it's pretty detailed even if out of place. Gabe 17:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Earthquake defined

i changed the first line as it was a poor defintion of an earthquake, the current one is more accurate but might need some more explanation or to even be changed again. i removed the comment from the end beacuse it is largely inaccurate. Whilst the cause of deep focus earthquakes i.e those in the Benioff zone is unclear as it mentions in the article. this has nothing to do with the large magnitude quakes or melting. Bumfluff 22:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moonquakes

Perhaps this page deserves a link to the moonquake page? And any other pages related to earthquakes on other planets.

[edit] Loma Prieta Earthquake

This is also sometimes called "The World Series" Earthquake, since it had struck just as thw World Series Game was just getting underway. It had hit in 1989. Martial Law 20:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC) :)

[edit] Odd analogy

Maybe I'm just a bit dense, but even after having thought about it for a while, I can't see the relavancy of the following analogy, or any parallelism between it and the size of a fault and potential earthquake magnitude, and the size of a speaker and how big a sound it can produce.

Just as larger loudspeakers can produce a greater volume of sound than smaller ones, larger faults can cause higher magnitude earthquakes than smaller ones can.

If someone feels the analogy is appropriate and puts it back, I will figure the problem is mine and not protest/revert. But I think the section reads better without it. HTH, Jim_Lockhart 04:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Section on earthquake size

Finally got around to reworking this section, which I felt lacked logical flow and sounded slightly dumbed-down. OTOH, if some middle-school students put their heads together to write it, I'd say they'd done a pretty descent job; either way, I hope my editing has done justice to the work that my predecessor contributors put into it.
Because I'm still not quite sure that I understood what earlier contributors meant about "relative size of different events in different places", I'd really appreciate the input of a seismologist on the content about seismic moment and moment magnititude. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 06:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editorial suggestions

1. I think the section on the scales is way too technical and overdetailed for the purposes of this page. Since this information is discussed in detail on the corresponding pages for each scale, it would be best if the Earthquake page only included a brief overview.

2. The same goes for the seismic maps, which deserve a page of their own where all the details could be provided on how the maps are created and used. The earthquake page would be better off if, instead of getting into the details, it served as a portal for all earthquake-related subjects.

Wiki rules! :) 24 April 2006

[edit] Earthquake size and frequency of occurrence

This separate section created is congruent with its earlier section of "Measuring and mapping earthquakes" that talks about measurement of the characteristics of earthquakes, and could be better being under it. Thus, I do not really see a need to create a separate section just for it. —Sengkang 02:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The title seems more congruent, but not the content; content-wise, I think it's better where it is now. I assume that's why the person who moved it inserted the link to it. OTOH, the section on size and frequency could do with some more information.

Also, what do you think of adding some shake maps from other localities than the US, such as these that the Japanese Meteorological Agency publishes? These are usual available within minutes of a quake's occurrence and show shindo (shaking) intensities in areas affected. Jim_Lockhart 03:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Kudos to the contributors. (Maabahuka 06:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Seismic scales split

It looks like the material for seismic scales has grown more detailed and is now far beyond the simple introduction to earthquake topics. I'd like to propose creating a Seismic scale article, which could have an overview of scale types and links to articles for specific scales (we have a number of those - see Scale#Seismology). Any thoughts? Asknine 17:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Then the briefest of overviews could stay here, a discussion of the (5?) different scales (and their uses) at Seismic scale (maybe Seismic scales?) with the most detailed discussion at the individual articles. Let me know if you get started and want any help! Inner Earth 18:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggested the singular form for the word "scale" because (a) it seems in line with Wiki's article naming conventions Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Prefer_singular_nouns and (b) the article may beging with explaining the general purpose of "a sesimic scale" as a measuring tool. The plural form as in "Seismic scales" is more appropriate in a category name. We can also create the "Seismic scales" article and redirect it to the "Seismic scale" to avoid confusion. Asknine 18:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to User:74.132.8.81 for catching the additions to the seismic scale section by User:128.205.145.139 on September 1 regarding the Richter scale. Having unsourced POV statements is one thing, but a bald assertion that "neither this article nor Wikipedia in general should be used for any serious purpose" doesn't belong here. I removed that bit, but left the substantive POV statement. Could others who are more knowledgeable take a look? Waitak 06:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

What is POV exactly in this section? Moment magnitude is the scale currently used. Read any seismology publication, you'll see M_{w _{being used... David.Monniaux 21:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)}}

_{[edit] 1138 Aleppo earthquake death toll}

_{Sorry for sticking this here, but I can't seem to find a relevant WikiProject. I just started the 1138 Aleppo earthquake article and according to the 2004 source I used, the 230,000 death toll figure taken from USGS and used in {{Deadliest earthquakes}} is completely bogus. This is quite amusing as the template is on that page. Can someone who actually knows something about earthquakes take a look at the source I used and see if I've been taken in some sort of elaborate misinformation or if the USGS really is propagating bad info? Thanks, BT 04:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)}

_{[edit] Hong Kong Earth Tremor}

_{Hey, did anyone living in Hong Kong feel an earth tremor at 7:53pm today, September 14? Trying to work out if it was just a few of us... —preceding unsigned comment by 202.64.169.72 (talk • contribs)}

_{I didn't feel it, but got a phone call from someone asking if I did. Waitak 14:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)}

_{[edit] Hypocenter/Epicenter}

_{I edited a mistake where it was stated that the epicenter was the origin of an earthquake and the hypocenter the point on the surface above it... I changed it around}

_{[edit] List of doomsday scenarios}

_{Could use votes to save this article, thanks MapleTree 22:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)}

_{[edit] Permalink for Wikipedia Research}

_{Hello, editors of Earthquake! I am currently working on an essay on Wikipedia, part of which will feature a comparison of articles of Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Brittanica. To ensure that I send reviewers articles that have not been recently vandalized or have not been involved in an edit war, I would like, by December 31st, a revision of this article to be listed at User:Chrisisme/Research-permalinks that is not vandalized and/or is generally at peak quality. Thank you! Chrisisme 19:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)}

_{Hey: It says "hello" in the first sentence and i cant seem to get rid of it.}

_{[edit] 35 in 1 day?}

_{There is a passage in the article that states "As a result, many more earthquakes are reported than in the past -- currently, about 35 per day worldwide". I think there needs to be a link to where this information is coming from, as taking a look at this link from the Japanese Bureau of Meteorology, on 25th December 2006 there were many more that 35 in just Japan alone. 219.123.91.104 04:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)}

_{I like earthquakes. Earthquakes are coool. But this website should have iformation on all he earthquakes like the saguenay eathquake because i have to do a project on it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.68.106.121 (talk • contribs • WHOIS) 03:05, 30 January 2007.}

_{[edit] Baku earthquake 2000 should be in the '20th century' list, not 21}

_{Am I right?}

_{Yes, it should be in the 20th century. Check this out: 20th century.Tohlz 16:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)}

_{[edit] Tidal influence?}

_{The coincidence(?) of having three strong earthquakes on 12/26 within four recent years prompts my question. 12/26 is close to Earth's perhelion with the sun, and Jupiter's pull causes activity on Io. Can gravitational pull from our sun and/or moon be strong enough to trigger an event that was building up? If so, there would be more quakes around our perhelion (about 1/7) and during the semi-monthly periods when our solar and lunar tides coincide. 128.255.157.250 23:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)}

_{There is no statistical documentation of this or any other calender-related thing that gives more than random relationship to earthquake occurrences. Sorry. Cheers Geologyguy 23:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)}

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/a/r/Talk%7EEarthquake_2b7d.html"

Category: Wikipedia CD Selection