Talk:2012 Buenos Aires rail disaster

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on February 23, 2012.
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 22, 2015, and February 22, 2019.

SAME[edit]

Can we please have an explanation as to who or what SAME is? Mjroots (talk) 12:07, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Sistema de Atención Médica de Emergencia, [1], the Buenos Aires ambulance/emergency medical service. Grover Snodd (talk) 12:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, incorporated into the article. Mjroots (talk) 12:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Train type[edit]

The lede currently refers to a locomotive, but the image shows hat seems to be a multiple unit. Which is the case? Can anyone give more details on the type and ID of the train involved in this sad incident? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a multiple unit type of train. But by tradition of the structure of the "classic" trains, the unit in the front holding the driver is called the "locomotive", thus the use in the news outlets. Cambalachero (talk) 13:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, the reference needs to be changed. It may be the practice in Argentina to refer to locomotive, but that is not how we understand the term in English, or how we use the term on the English Wikipedia. Similarly, Argentinians refer to buses as colectivos, but we call them buses, not collectives. Skinsmoke (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cambalachero (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, but we now have "front carriage and the first three cars", which is even more ambiguous ("car" is short or "carriage"). And by "type and ID", I mean the maker, class and fleet number - not as a train spotter, but because this may turn out, say, not to be the first such incident involving the train, or type. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Sarmiento Line has a mix of trains. They were built by different Japanese companies, and 16 cars were built by Fabricaciones Militares. The electrical components were built by Toshiba. So these trains are known by this name. Most trains started operation in 1959. There were some modifications to these trains in Argentina. The specifications in Spanish are:
  • Tipo de Coche: coche motor eléctrico autónomo, 2 motores de 150 hp por coche, montados en el bogie delantero.
  • Fuente de energia: contacto por patín con 3 tercer riel de 600/800 v c.c. Both the Sarmiento and Mitre lines operate at 830 VDC.
  • Potencia: 300hp
  • Velocidad máxima: 135 km/h
  • Alto:4,44 m
  • Ancho:3,134 m
  • Longitud: 22,3m
  • Frenos: Wabco tipo universal U20 en combinación con freno electrodinámico.

Best regards, Alpertron (talk) 20:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

While accepting the scale of the accident probably warrants the term "disaster", does this title adequately describe the incident uniquely? This is not the first major rail crash in Buenos Aires, and the term "disaster" could equally be applied to the September 2011 accident in the barrio of Flores, in which 11 were killed and 200 injured when two trains collided with a bus on a level crossing. Surprisingly we do not yet have an article on the English Wikipedia, but there is one on the Spanish Wikipedia. Perhaps 2012 Buenos Aires rail disaster would be a better title. Skinsmoke (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article began as "2012 Buenos Aires train crash", and it was boldly moved by User:Undescribed a few hours ago. I agree that the year may be a good idea in the title (unless the disaster gets an unique name in the press as time passes), but should we use "train crash" or "rail disaster"? I would go for the second, as proposed by Skinsmoke.
In any case, this article is at the main page right now, and should stay at a stable name. If there's a consensus for a name, perhaps the article should be move protected afterwards, at least while it's mentioned there Cambalachero (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go with that. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I saw nothing wrong with the original title. As said above, the article should not be moved again whilst it is on ITN. I would suggest that any move to a new title is proposed via WP:RM.
The original article name '2012 Buenos Aires train crash' was fine for me since it included the year. Also 'rail disaster' just sounds silly, a 'rail' is what a train runs on, and most people would say 'train crash', whilst a train is more accurate. (if that sound right) I'd say move back to original. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 18:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're getting bogged down with train–rail here. The term used depends which country you were brought up in. Rail crash or rail disaster would be normal terminology in the United Kingdom, train wreck or train crash in other countries. Let's not get tied up in a fight over national varieties of English! I can see the argument that the magnitude of deaths and injuries suggests disaster rather than crash (in which nobody at all might be even injured), but I don't think it's worth arguing about much. What is important is that 2012 is restored: there was a fatal rail accident in Buenos Aires, on the same line, just six months earlier. Skinsmoke (talk) 19:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected[edit]

Regrettably it has proved necessary to semi-protect the article for a few days due to IP vandalism. Being on the MP means that the article is getting lots of attention, which also means lots of unconstructive editing by IPs and non-confirmed editors. Any editor wishing to make a constructive contribution is welcome to raise the issue on this talk page. Mjroots (talk) 18:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (archived)[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Buenos Aires rail disaster → 2012 Buenos Aires rail disaster – See #Title for a discussion about the name. Cambalachero (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion for a different accident that happened in a different place in a different year? Lugnuts (talk) 11:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Buenos Aires is the name of the city, Flores and Once are the names of two of the seven train stations on this railway that are within the city limits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.50.180.50 (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Standard practice to give the year in the title.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - having the year in the title allows for articles on other accidents in BA in other years. Mjroots (talk) 17:26, 24 February 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Investigation[edit]

Which agency will investigate the disaster? That agency needs to have a Wikipedia article. I recently started articles on various investigation agencies of rail accidents around the world. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Argentina has an agency for this purpose, although I could be wrong. Traditionally, civil law countries seem to have regarded accident investigations as the responsibility of the investigating judge (see also Inquisitorial system; there might also be a technical investigation internal to the railway company, but no report would be published. This has begun to change in Europe in recent years, so that most or all countries now seem to have independent technical investigations with published reports (operating in parallel with the criminal investigation), but I'm not sure whether any non-European countries have gone in that direction. The position is different for aviation because there are international agreements (e.g. the Convention_on_International_Civil_Aviation) governing the area. Grover Snodd (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Grammar[edit]

Third sentence in first paragraph 'There were about 1,000 passengers on board the train, which failed to stop and hit the buffers...' should read 'There were about 1,000 passengers on board the train, which failed to stop and INSTEAD hit the buffers...' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.226.132 (talk) 07:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, its correct and does not need any changing. Instead implies that it should not have hit the buffers, but it did.

Hello? The name, "once de Septiembre," means, "September 11!"

re that 3rd sentence, "buffers" needs defining/explaining. 67.171.186.151 (talk) 01:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. That September 11th refers to 1888 (death of Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, the name of the train line). Nothing to do with skyscrapers. Alpertron (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Buffers now wikilinked to buffer stop. Mjroots (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ah, now i understand re buffers. to be clear, my previous comment began with "re that 3rd..."; the comment before mine re sept 11 is from someone else. 67.171.186.151 (talk) 07:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency Response[edit]

They just found another body, victim no. 51 was between cars 3 and 4, which weren't checked for survivors by emergency services. February 24, 17:54 . 57 hours after the incident. http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1451301-a-48-horas-del-choque-la-madre-de-lucas-clama-nadie-desaparece-no-hay-que-descansar-en-la-busqueda (Spanish) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.50.180.50 (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Buenos Aires rail disaster#Domestic[edit]

About "Minister Julio de Vido announced that the presidency would initiate a lawsuit against TBA, the owners of the Sarmiento line" I read all the reference and it don't appear any word of the "lawsuit against TBA".--Bsea (talk) 16:36, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved Consensus appears to be against the move at this time. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 05:29, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


2012 Buenos Aires rail disaster → Once rail disaster – The usual convention for incidents occurring in metropolitan areas is to use the name of the station or locality. Note that the Spanish language article es:Accidente ferroviario de Once de 2012 uses the station name, although I don't think the year is necessary as there aren't any articles on other incidents at that station. EdC (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose For the average English speaking person, Once rail disaster makes little sense, and is liable to be misinterpreted as the English word "once" instead of the Spanish word for eleven. Also, it is best to avoid any renaming debates for the time being.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose "once" is an English word, so this would then be some grammatically incorrect phrasing for a singular rail disaster, without indicating anything. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 19:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The word may lead to language misunderstandings that do not exist in Spanish, so it is not a good idea to repeat their naming. Besides, all names used or suggested so far are just descriptive names, the press has not created yet an unique special name for the event. Cambalachero (talk) 20:50, 29 February 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Incident details[edit]

The time of the incident is not stated anywhere in the article. Various media reports [2] [3] indicate that the incident happened at 8:33 ART when train 16 operating the Moreno-Once service 3772 crashed into Once station's buffers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.141.91 (talk) 22:22, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2012_Buenos_Aires_rail_disaster&oldid=1196611138"