Talk:1707 Hōei earthquake

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1707 Hōei earthquake article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from 1707 Hōei earthquake appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 February 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the 1707 Hōei earthquake was the largest in Japanese history, triggering a devastating tsunami and causing at least 5,000 casualties in Honshu, Shikoku and Kyūshū?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/February.

Wikipedia

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 28, 2012, October 28, 2015, October 28, 2018, October 28, 2020, October 28, 2023, and October 28, 2024.

Earthquakes High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of earthquakes, seismology, plate tectonics, and related subjects 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.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Japan: Geography & environment / History Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 17:04, November 5, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Mid

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

This article is supported by the Geography and environment task force.

This article is supported by the History task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Death toll

The number of causalties attributed to an earthquake is always a problem - we can't event agree on the number for the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Having said that there appears to be a general consensus in published catalogues and scientific papers that the casualties for this event were about 5,000. A stronger source than a news report would be needed to overturn that I think. Mikenorton (talk) 12:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IISEE link

The link to the online earthquake catalogue of the IISEE is currently unavailable and has been marked as a deadlink. I am very hopeful that it will reappear soon as none of the institute's urls are currently working - I suspect a temporary problem, but I will check later. Mikenorton (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's now working again with some slight changes to the home page, so I removed the tag. Mikenorton (talk) 00:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Magnitude Estimates

The high end of the published estimates (9.1-9.3) is from what looks like a conference poster by Ishikawa. Reading some relatively recent work on the tsunami models for this event (Furumura et al., 2012, I can agree that the generally accepted Mw 8.7 estimate (and the Mw 8.4 in the NGDC significant earthquake database) seems low for such a long rupture area. Has anyone found a peer-reviewed article that supports a higher magnitude? Elriana (talk) 14:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well that took a few years, I'm not sure why I didn't spot it before. After a lot of searching around, I agree that the higher magnitude figure from Ishikawa has not been repeated in any peer-reviewed literature, so I've removed it. Mikenorton (talk) 16:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1707 Hōei earthquake. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/usc0001xgp.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722072314/https://www.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dat/nenpo/no48/48c0/a48c0p13.pdf to http://www.dpri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dat/nenpo/no48/48c0/a48c0p13.pdf

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1707 Hōei earthquake. 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.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]