Talk:2022 West Java earthquake

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

Mww[edit]

Can this be linked in the lead so we know what is meant by it? Thanks. 86.141.250.185 (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

checkY done. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:27, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Death toll issue[edit]

The BNPB confirmed 62 deaths but a majority of news sources are saying 162 deaths, citing West Java Governor Ridwan Kamil. This report explained 162 is an error in calculating the dead. It goes on to say that claims of 100 deaths were from word of mouth and unverified. I.e., 162 is the sum of confirmed deaths by BNPB + unverified number. I think it's best to follow what the BNPB says. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 01:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dora the Axe-plorer, I believe that both numbers are a bit outdated. An article from the Washington Post puts the death toll above 250 and I fear this will rise as time goes on. Here is the link to the article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/22/indonesia-java-earthquake-death-toll/ Jurisdicta (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I commented this while changing the death toll from 162 to 62 in previous revisions. I'm aware it has since been updated. This comment shouldn't be a concern anymore. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 21:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Intensity[edit]

USGS suggests Intensity IX [1]https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us7000ir9t/shakemap/stations Yes, IX is ridiculously high, but the Quake was very shallow situated next to a water enriched sediments filled basin surrounded by Mountains. The Waves got reflected by the Mountains and amplified inside the Basin. VI would be unusual low for a shallow Mw 5.6. So the Argument "feels ridiculously high" is stupid, especially since we have a trustworthy Agency which reports IX. We have a Source. Whereas BMKG´s VI report is based on a preliminary Shakemap. The BMKG Intensities given in the Article aren´t reported by the Population. Those Intensities were calculated. We certainly can say the Quake wasn´t a V-VI as mentioned in that Article. We wouldn´t see such a Destruction, no matter how bad the buildings have been constructed. Proposal: Mentioning both BMKG and USGS Intensities in the Information Box if you really want to stick to VI. 91.41.25.193 (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The USGS ShakeMap which gives MMI IX is an automated simulation, not actual data. Those "stations" in the USGS url are DYFI reports, user-generated. The BMKG reports and revises their intensity data—the MMI in Cianjur was V–VI, not preliminary as you said. We use data evaluated by seismologists over an unreviewed simulation. Intensity VI in the article shall remain unchanged until the BMKG or other institutions re-evaluate the MMI. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 04:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its doubtful that the Data in the News Article is the revised one. Its time stamp is the 21st November, 15:38 WIB, just 2 Hours after the Quake. Those Intensities given are based on the automatically created shakemap by BMKG. I agree that the USGS shakemap isn´t to use at primary source, since its by far not the best one and not reviewed. But it is a hint, that the MMI VI reported by BMKG has to be taken with some doubt. Another official Agency reporting a higher Intensity, VIII, is NOAA. https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazel/view/hazards/earthquake/event-more-info/10654. I´m not saying it overrules BMKG, but we should t least mention that there are other Sources which give higher Intensities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.41.25.193 (talk) 05:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The MMI in Cianjur was mentioned by a BMKG seismologist. That's credible enough coming from an authoritative organization. Do you have proof that BMKG data are also automated? The NGDC MMI is taken from USGS. There's no point adding unscrutinized data alongside the one that is. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 06:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shakemap Data by BMKG is available Minutes after an Earthquake. After any Earthquake, you cannot have analyzed Data just 2 Hours after it occured, especially, when it is a more complexe one as it seemt to be the case this Time. But we shouldn´t discuss, what Intensity, what Source is right. This is NOT the Task of Wikipedia. As i mentioned before, we have different Intensities reported. It is NOT our right to decide whats correct. If both come from trustworthy Sources, we should mention both. It is NOT our Right, to decide, which one has the higher Quality. Because we don´t know it. We aren´t seismologists, we aren´t active in the BNPD. This is my Point. It is not about claiming BMKG is wrong. I am just saying there is contradictory information of 2 different Trustworthy sources. And we shouldn´t decide which one is the better, because we can´t, and we shouldn´t. Thats why i´m proposing we should add both, as it is done with several Quakes in the Past. I guess i made my Opinion clear. I´m not going to reply to any Questions about the specific Intensity´s of BMKG or USGS, since thats not what this Discussion should be about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.41.25.193 (talk) 06:38, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you're not going to participate in this discussion, why even begin. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 09:40, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because the Discussion i want to have is about hints that the Intensity may have been highr than VI which should be mentioned for completeness, whereas you discuss whether BMKG or USGS are right. Two different Topics. 91.41.25.193 (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And what I said was the USGS ShakeMap is a simulation which does not represent reality. The intensity may be higher than VI, but without reliable sources (definitely not the USGS simulation), there's nothing to change. The BMKG seismologists' words are the best thing to follow now. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 06:12, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of your argument about the VIII intensity by NOAA, they are probably sourced from DYFI by USGS. For example, the recent earthquake in my country, the Philippines, last July, the intensity by DYFI is IX, which is suspiciously the same as the intensity given by NGDC. Let's just wait for some reliable journals that will probably say an intensity >VI. Filipinohere (talk) 09:54, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the End it will be secondary Sources, sourcing either BMKG or USGS. I fear we will be stuck always at V-VI vs. VIII-IX. And since we aren´t the ones who should decide whats right, we should mention both. 91.41.25.193 (talk) 05:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping this event on ITN[edit]

I think this should be removed since it occurred like two weeks ago and that's pretty old news to me. Quake1234 (talk) 10:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be removed when a new event is added to ITN. There isn't a set amount of time for things to be on there. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:20, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i agree with jim. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 22:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2022_West_Java_earthquake&oldid=1196924603"