Talk:2010 Boston water emergency

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Massachusetts Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Mid-importance).

CfD[edit]

First of all, please do not try to delete articles while they are being written without first bringing this to the talk page, that's very poor form. Second, there is nothing in WP:NOTNEWS that this is violating. Two million people with contaminated water and a state of emergency in American city is a very notable event. If it's not, should 2006_Danvers_Chemical_Fire be deleted? Should New_York_City_blackout_of_1977? Certainly not. Miserlou (talk) 23:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amen. As has been noted by others elsewhere, there are many WP editors (and even administrators) prone to trigger-happy deletion, thinking that they are improving WP by applying one policy without considering the others, and without checking to see if the article is currently being written or edited. David Spector (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New section[edit]

I have just added a new section on the possibility of contamination of the emergency substitute water supply in current use. I have provided many secondary references. Please do not delete this section without following WP procedure. David Spector (talk) 17:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The backup water supply doesn't come from ponds around the Weston Reservoir(s). It comes from the Sudbury Reservoir and one of the 3 Framingham Reservoirs via the Sudbury Aqueduct. This can be augmented from the Wachusett Reservoir via the Wachusett Tunnel and an open channel that begins in Marlborough and flows into the Sudbury.

The two Weston surface reservoirs (The Weston and the Norumbega) can normally supply additional backup water into the Hultman Aqueduct, which is currently undergoing rehabilitation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.116.139.84 (talk) 10:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to 2010 Boston water emergency[edit]

To match Wikipedia style, shouldn't this article be renamed 2010 Boston water emergency? --Crunch (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or merge it into the water authority article's relevant section. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2010 Boston water emergency. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100507145520/http://www.boston.com:80/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/03/mass_says_broken_pipe_could_be_fixed_within_days?mode=PF to http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/03/mass_says_broken_pipe_could_be_fixed_within_days?mode=PF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2010 Boston water emergency. 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: 18 January 2022).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]