Talk:2017 Sierra Leone mudslides

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israeli propaganda[edit]

Israel aid was the only mentioned so far, but the UAE (and possibly other countries) have also dedicated funds for Sierra Leone's relief, but have channeled it through the World Food Program. Channeling relief through international bodies should not exclude the country from being mentioned for its contribution, so long as it has indeed dedicated funds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpatico qa (talk • contribs) 11:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please remember Wikipedia is not just an indiscriminate collection of information. This is not a scoreboard tallying which countries contributed to the relief effort. If they channeled funds/supplies through the WFP, that is fantastic but we do not need to list them; the mention about the WFP will suffice.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 16:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We collect all that is known and relevant to the subject, without subjective selection of which facts we deem suitable to list and which omit. We strive not to omit true and verifiable information. Listing only the country that didn't channel it's support via an established framework of international collaboration unfairly singles out that countries as a donor from its neighbors that may have provided more aid, but through coordinated international relief. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpatico qa (talk • contribs) 19:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please also read WP:RGW. The reason we cover Israel's aid is because more sources discussed it, noting it was the first instance of foreign aid to reach Sierra Leone. We are not here to be "fair", just to analyze the sources. Like I said, it is fantastic that the countries are supporting affected residents with aid through the WFP but it is WP:UNDUE to list all of them.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Singling out Israel in your mention, in which you cited local media, you are giving it undue weight. Other countries have contributed more in aid, and their aid reached first through international collaboration framework. Simpatico qa (talk) 06:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT and WP:UNDUE could also be said of the narrative that you have imposed. To be balanced, the page should either be more inclusive, or single out no country.

  • @Simpatico qa: I am now requesting you temporarily back away from the article and reassess. You clearly have a bias against Israel as indicated by your dismissal of a reliable source and the change of this discussion header. This has no place in a productive discussion. I have outlined to you quite thoroughly that other countries will soon be mentioned when specifics are found.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:24, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All major donations thus far have been included. However, the bias against Israel is unnecessary and I take offense to it. Please remember to keep a WP:NPOV in the future.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No offense intended. Indeed thank you for listing the relief (and pledges of relief) from all of China, Ireland, United Kingdom, Guinea, Nigeria, and Liberia. It reads much more balanced and inclusive now. I hope you will also list Turkey's and the UAE's<[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpatico qa (talk • contribs) 08:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 Sierra Leone mudslides/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Carabinieri (talk · contribs) 01:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Review[edit]

Hi, first of all thanks for all the work you put into this article. I enjoyed reading it.

  • I feel like the article could really use some more copyediting. Here are a few instances:
  • "causing what is considered one of the worst disasters in decades" By whom? Aren't there objective measurements for this such as number of deaths, property destroyed, etc?
  • "In the Western Area of Sierra Leone itself" Why "itself"?
  • "including city's situation at or below sea level" What city? Freetown? Should be "the city's". "Location" would be better than "situation".
  • "As many as 1,141 people have been confirmed dead or missing" That doesn't make sense to me? Is it possible that fewer people have been confirmed dead or missing?
  • "to curve the threat of disease" curve?
  • "Cause: Landslides due to heavy rain" Well, the rain was the cause, landslides were the effect
  • I'm not sure I'm the best person to ask when it comes to copyediting. Have you considered asking around to see if someone would be willing to go through the article? WP:GOCE or relevant WikiProjects might good places to ask.
  • It doesn't seem right to me that ReliefWeb is listed as the place sources such as UN or World Bank reports were published. As far as I understand it, ReliefWeb merely hosts these things on its website. Also, several of those sources have authors that should be identified.
  • I'm not sure I understand the final paragraph of the "Impact" section. The numbers don't really make any sense to me.
  • "As many as 5,900 people were affected by the disaster" What does "affected" mean in this context?
  • "An initial estimate placed the number at 205" The number of what?
  • "but rescue and aid workers cautioned that the survival rates for many of the 600 people still missing were slim" But then how do you get from 205 to 5,900?

If there's anything I can do to help you find a copyeditor, feel free to ask.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:23, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks. I've done a little more copyediting (feel free to revert anything you disagree with) and will be doing some more, but I think it might be best if you could get someone else to give it another once-over. I also feel like parts of the article presuppose a certain familiarity with the geography of Freetown or Sierra Leone most readers probably won't have. Maybe you could give a little more background here and there. Here are a few more issues/questions:
  • The numbers in the infobox don't make sense to me. The second source claims there were 500 confirmed deaths and over 800 missing. That adds up to more than the 1,141 the infobox says are dead or missing. Presumably, more people were either confirmed dead or alive since that source was published. I'd suggest simply removing the number of people missing.
  • "The lack of enforcement of a moratorium" I'm assuming this is referring to a moratorium on housing construction
  • "to hasten evacuations from danger zones" were there evacuations? The article doesn't mention them.
  • "Highly mobile, the saturated debris flow, carrying mud, large boulders, tree trunks, and other material, advanced toward Lumley Creek with a wall of flood water leading in front" Is this referring to the two mudslides described before? Both of them? What's Lumley Creek?
  • "The same day, four other mudslides took place in Regent, Goderich, and Tacuguma" What are Goderich and Tacuguma? Can you give any more details on these incidents?
  • How do Western Area Rural and Western Area Urban relate to Freetown?
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, the article should generally use metric units.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Carabinieri I'll get back to work tomorrow and talk with K.e.coffman to see if he can copy-edit. If you find it appropriate, we can put the article "on hold" to work out these points raised.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for response and your work on the article. I have one more question: Floods are repeatedly mentioned in the lead, the background, etc. but there's no mention of floods actually taking place in 2017, at least not in the "Impact" section. Is there any information on this?
I've randomly checked a few of the sources:
  • The BBC report in fn 2 doesn't mention Freetown's elevation or its population.
  • The NYT report in fn 24 states that "320 people were buried on Tuesday afternoon". That would have been August 15. It also mentions that more mass graves were being planned.
  • The link in fn 25 is dead.
  • The source in fn 28 doesn't mention diarrhea or cholera.
I think this is close to being ready, but maybe you could recheck the sources, to make sure they all have the information attributed to them.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:15, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think, User:TheGracefulSlick?--Carabinieri (talk) 04:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The nominating editor won't be completing this review, but I can help finish anything that needs attending to. I didn't know the nominating editor, but I have worked before on a GA with K.e.coffman who is mentioned above by the reviewer nominating editor. I fixed the elevation claim, but I cannot speak to the others, as the note numbers have been reshuffled. Which ones again needed to be looked at? Please advise. Thanks!  spintendo  13:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A portion of text which was insufficiently paraphrased from the source material has been re-phrased.  spintendo  13:56, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed all of the dead links and assigned them freshly archived URL's. The Checklinks for this article now shows all white rows.  spintendo  16:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Carabinieri: Let me know if there is anything else that's needed to be done here. Thank you!  spintendo  02:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Spintendo:, thanks for taking this on. It's a real shame what happened with Graceful. I understand that sockpuppetry is a problem, but to throw out productive editors left and right the way we do nowadays is hardly helpful. Anyway, sorry for getting off-track. I think the way you re-organized parts of the article is helpful, but there are a few issues:

  • The lead calls this "one of the most deadly and destructive disasters in decades". First, that's a little vague. Is this one of the deadliest in the world or in Sierra Leone or what? Secondly, there's no source for this claim.
✓Omitted: I've removed this bit of hyperbole.  spintendo  00:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be a contradiction concerning Freetown's elevation between the lead and the first section.
✓Clarified: Freetown is almost like the center of a bowl, with 400 meter high mountains surrounding it, but its very hilly, which accounts for the variations in height above sea level. At the beaches it is definitely at sea level but that quickly begins to rise. I omitted the mention in the lead so there is no disparity.  spintendo  00:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is still a little unclear to me. If there are beaches, it doesn't seem entirely correct to me to say that the elevation is 30 meters. I also wasn't able to find the information in the source, but maybe I'm just too stupid to use the map.--Carabinieri (talk) 06:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The parts of the city where people live and work are at about 30 meters whereas the beaches (where no one lives) are at sea level. But I agree with you that the way this is worded is confusing. I could change this to read as The peninsula where Freetown is located has a topography of "thick, wooded mountains which run parallel to the Atlantic for 25 miles."[2] Located in and around this variegated topography, Freetown's elevation with regards to the Atlantic Ocean varies from coastal areas which are at sea level to approximately 350 meters above sea level in higher-ground areas. As far as the map, it can be difficult to activate, let me see if I can't find a better source.  spintendo  01:10, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a map which shows the elevation. The only issue with that map is I'm not entirely sure where they are getting this information. The information looks correct when compared to other sources such as Google Maps, but the map doesn't state clearly the source of the info, so there is no telling where it's from.  spintendo  14:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The way the "August 14th mudslides" is organized seems a little confusing. Nothing from "The disaster affected another 12 settlements..." on appears to refer specifically to the events in Regent.
✓Re-titled: I agree that the info in these sections does jump around a bit. I can rewrite as little or as much as you'd like, just let me know.  spintendo  00:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still a little confused. The article starts with Sugar Loaf mountain, then moves to Regent, Goderich, and Tacuguma, and then comes Sugar Loaf again. Do those 12 settlements include any of the previously mentioned places?--Carabinieri (talk) 06:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-worded these. Let me know if they work.  spintendo  01:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The order in the "Response" section also seems a little counterintuitive. Shouldn't "People initially used their bare hands" come before the information about ambulances and search teams?
✓Omitted: The part about using bare hands wasn't referenced, so I just removed it. If there are any other parts of this section which seem out of place let me know.  spintendo  00:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd probably just say "UNICEF" instead of "United Nations Children's Fund", since that's what most people know it by.--Carabinieri (talk) 23:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Changed to UNICEF.  spintendo  00:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-08/17/c_136534135.htm
  2. ^ Sierra Leone - The Natural Landscape: Relief Features (1986). DSHWN/SMS (ed.). The New Encyclopedia Britannica. Volume 16. p. 734. ISBN 0852293879.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link) CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

Thanks for your patience. I've done a little more copyediting and re-organizing. Could you check that I didn't mess up anything? Otherwise, I think this looks good to go. Thanks again for stepping in.--Carabinieri (talk) 10:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've passed this nomination. Thanks again.--Carabinieri (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2017_Sierra_Leone_mudslides&oldid=1196739745"