Talk:Manfalut railway accident

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Egypt may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

A news item involving Manfalut railway accident was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 18 November 2012.

Wikipedia

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Low‑importance

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

Egypt Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt 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.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Operations Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

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

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Operations task force.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. There doesn't seem to be any consensus here that the term "accident" is inconsistent with human error/negligence or is biased. This close should not prejudice a new move request if for example there is data suggesting a different name is more common, etc. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 01:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Manfalut train accident → Manfalut train collision – The word "accident" is used less frequently now since the misnomer implies it was outside of human control. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 03:17, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable to me. 66.87.69.165 (talk) 04:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds unnecessary. Did anyone intend for the collision to occur? Not according to the article. If the incident was not intended, it must have therefore been an accident. Boneyard90 (talk) 19:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't necessarily saying that it was intentional (though it is very presumptive for us to say it wasn't purposeful before it can be investigated) but accident implies no one is to blame (a human failure can always be found in any incident). Collision is strictly neutral and factual. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:NPOV. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:48, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It's simply not true that "accident" implies nobody is to blame or that it is a misnomer. It merely implies that the incident was unintentional. The OED defines it as an "unfortunate and unforeseen event involving damage or injury"; blame is not mentioned. It is true that official agencies are moving away from "accident", but that's no reason to change perfectly good English. It is in no way POV. As to it being "very presumptive for us to say it wasn't purposeful before it can be investigated", oh please... Let's not throw away common sense in the name of dogma! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Infoboxes[edit]

Why are there two infoboxes in this article? Why isn't the map displaying in the first one? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]