Talk:2014 Mount Everest ice avalanche

Worst avalanche 'on' Everest

I have some doubts that the text:

" ... considered as the worst disaster to ever occur on Mount Everest; surpassing a disaster in 1996 that killed 8 people."

is correct, though I have heard multiple media reports saying the same.

I had added text and this source here, that specifically says the 12 November 1995 avalanche that killed 42 people, one of a series that occurred around that time, was "... on the slopes of Mount Everest".

An IP editor, 72.87.103.201 (talk · contribs) without a summary, changed it to read as I note above. I reverted it back based on the source I had. They re-reverted, with a summary saying "The 1995 disaster occurred NEAR Mount Everest".

Does anyone know more about the issue? I have not been able to find much on-line about the November 1995 events. N.b I am discussing the issue with the editor on their talkpage. --220 of ^Borg 07:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Can't see the source you've linked. Is there one available to all? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, a simple Google of "Everest worst" shows sources such as The New York Times, Reuters, Sky News, France24, NBC, The Guardian all in agreement that this event is the single worst accident on the slopes of Everest. WP:V, not truth. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunate you can't see it. It's a book: Natural Disasters by Lee Allyn Davis, Infobase Publishing, 2008. ISBN 9-781-43811-878-9 on page16. I googled Mount+Everest+november+1995+avalanche and got some references to the correct avalanche, but they do say 'near' Mt Everest, aljazeera for example (last sentence), so that seems to be the issue. How near is near enough.

If multiple RS say otherwise then I have to concur with them. 220 of ^Borg 08:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm no expert with the geography of Everest, but does this help at all? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, it added a bit not said elsewhere. One part on page 234 said those killed were "... nestled against the hillside in a lodge." So it appears they weren't killed 'on' the mountain. --220 of ^Borg 09:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Apparently 'Gokyo Avalanche' is what the 1995 one is known as, see [Gokyo], which has lot of details about it. --220 of ^Borg 09:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The Gokyo valley is on the approach to Cho Oyu. One suspects "Everest" is used as a reference point in the press reports because of public recognition of the name rather than actual proximity. There was also very heavy snowfall at the time that trapped a large number of trekkers at Everest Base camp. They were immobilized by the depth of snow, but not actually buried in an avalanche.24.108.28.165 (talk) 18:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think the 2014 Mount Everest avalanche is the worst incident in Mount Everest. I think the 1995 Gokyo avalanche is the worst that killed 42 people. However, I couldn't find reliable sources for the incident and all of the media are reporting the current event as the worst one. This case needs to be verified. Ashish Lohorung (talk) 11:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I am not a content expert but this quote seems strangely formed:

According to mountaineer Tim Rippel, the victims were moving slowly and carrying large "loads of equipment, tents, stoves, oxygen and so on up to stock camps" when the avalanche occurred.

The descriptor "large" is OUTSIDE the quote, so should it be inside the quote or is it the author's opinion and thus should be removed? It's incorrect the way it is and should be altered one way or the other but I don't know which way, so I won't edit it. Jefferson1957 (talk) 06:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

'On' Everest

Reported location of fatalities was 5800 meters - less than 500 meters above Base Camp and more than 3000 meters below the peak of Mount Everest. The valley in which both Base Camp and the ice field are located no more belongs to Everest than it does to Hlotse, Nuptse, or any of the other peaks that surround it - particularly since it is well below their highest common elevation. I wasted a lot of time determining this - if only it had been reported as "adjacent", instead of stating it was "on" the mountain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.79.145.98 (talk) 18:28, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Serac collapse

Strictly speaking, this was a serac collapse rather than an avalanche. What came down were house-sized blocks of ice from a hanging glacier on the western spur of Everest rather than the release of a snow slope.24.108.28.165 (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC) [1]

If it was serac I would not mind changing its name to may be 2014 Mount Everest incident or some thing much more relative. Thanks for your suggestion. Ashish Lohorung (talk) 10:17, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes this really should be fixed. It wasn't an avalanche in the literal sense as without a qualifier it means snow avalanche. I would suggest the page title is changed to 2014 Mount Everest Disaster. I'm going to change the text a little to reflect this but leave the title for now to see if anyone as a difference of opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim McElwaine (talk • contribs) 10:44, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok so I made a load of changes, "avalanche" to "ice avalanche" or "disaster" and I also changed the name. There are still probably some inconsistencies to be fixed.

Earnings

Am I missing something? If a guide typically earns US$125 per climb, to make US$5000 per year they would have to do 40 climbs each year. Each climb may take 10 days or more, and the climbing season(s) are fairly short. How does this add up? PhilUK (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

There are several categories - porters, who ferry loads up to higher camps, guides, who shepherd the foreign climbers, and leaders who set up the fixed ropes and ensure everything is safe enough to go ahead. The scale varies according to the level of responsibility. The $125 per climb would be for a porter ferrying one load up over a couple of days, then returning to base camp.24.108.28.165 (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Not quite correct. Or rather it may be a difference in terminology. Guides in the European sense of the word are officially certified people who actually climb with the clients. Leaders do not set ropes. Leaders' main job is logistics - buying equipment, hiring porters, yaks, sherpas, paying fees, etc, etc. They usually sit in Camp 4 and coordinate the expedition. Ropes are set by Sherpas (the term includes the Nepalese mountaineers). Le Grand Bleu (talk) 22:25, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes you are missing something $125 a DAY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim McElwaine (talk • contribs) 11:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

'Background' and sequence of subjects

I think the paragraph 'Background' should be named to something more specific, since it only mentions the 'economic' aspects of the sherpa guides so to speak, and the aspects that surround it such as the tensions, competition with foreign guids etc. Maybe rename it "Background of sherpa deployment" or "Background of sherpas" or something like that?

Also, I think it's a little strange (un-encyclopedic) to start the article of with this subject referring to a lot of controversy, before even the factual information of the avalanche itself is given. I think it's better to start with the information about the avalanche itself, since that is what the article is about. Greetings, RagingR2 (talk) 08:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Background material normally appears first in articles... Orginally the section was called "overview" and contained the avalanche material immediately followed by the guide wages and such. That made the most sense to me personally. Putting the background material dead last certain makes no sense - it is material designed to help readers understand the context (why the guides were in harm's way when other climbers were not, why they are now angry, etc.) of the other material and thus should appear before that material (but after the avalanche bit is OK.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

guides?

is this so that the deads were guiding or they were a carrier? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.143.71.39 (talk) 14:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wordiness

I'm only correcting style & format. If my edits corrupt facts, I sincerely apologize. However, this header paragraph is overwritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erudite Manatee (talk • contribs) 03:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Discussion of possible causes

• http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/04/the-year-climate-change-closed-everest/361114/ I don't know if this is getting much coverage yet --Nigelj (talk) 17:43, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
• http://www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullNews.php?headline=Climate+change+hitting+Everest+region&NewsID=413234 Another news source. --Nigelj (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I too agree with Nigelj in this respect. Ashish Lohorung (talk) 08:22, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

mostly Sherpa guides

can somebody find who were the dead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.143.71.39 (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Sherpa earnings and avg. salary in Nepal

I seriously doubt this information is true. As far as I understand (correct me if I'm wrong), most (or maybe even all) Everest climbs are managed by a company called Asian Trekker. They charge 75-80k (or more) per person per climb. Some of it (like the $11k per person fee) goes to Nepal govt, some is spent on equipment and expenses. But there's still A LOT of money left. The organization is run by sherpas themselves. It just doesn't add up. I think NY Times relied on a bad source. Most likely, sherpas themselves, who don't want to publicize their real earnings. I think it should be reflected in the article that this calculation is only done by the newspaper in question and may be wrong. Same goes for "average salary in Nepal". I can't find any reliable information on that except some "self-serving" websites which calculate avg. salary from examples provided by users. Le Grand Bleu (talk) 00:30, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Compensation

I don't know a lot about how things work in Nepal, but why do the Sherpas family's think it's the government's job to compensate them for their loss? Did the government employ them, or coerce them to climb the mountain? Do they think the goverment should ban climbing Everest (which would cut off the best source of income the average Sherpa has), and because they failed to do this, they therefore owe the families cash to make up for the lost income (which they wouldn't have been expecting if the government had banned climbing Everest). AnnaGoFast (talk) 01:04, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how it works either. But speculating: By the government providing relief, it encourages other families to step up to fill the vacancies. It also is good government P.R. providing what is essentially life insurance. —EncMstr (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)