Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/1966 Toro earthquake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

1966 Toro earthquake

[edit]

Created/expanded by Qrfqr (talk), Mikenorton (talk). Nominated by Carabinieri (talk) at 23:50, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

  • I was going to nominate this with the following hook that I now propose as an alt.
ALT1 ... that following the 1966 Toro earthquake, more people died in the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a result of a large aftershock than died in the original earthquake? Mikenorton (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • An interesting article, new enough, long enough (1940 characters of "readable prose"), with credible online sources, in general satisfies Wikipedia's policy for DYK eligibility. I would rather choose the second hook: it's more "captivating", despite the mentioning of all the countries affected by the earthquake in the 1st hook. It just needs a bit more work to do regarding sources' pages especially when citing the number of deaths of the hook. Then it will be ready to go. Empathictrust (talk) 23:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I've added the requested page numbers, the UNESCO report was rather long. For the Foster and Jackson paper I've given two page numbers, the first has a table that gives this earthquake an 'event number' and another where the earthquake itself is discussed, but only as an event number. Mikenorton (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Pretty fine, DYK is ready for the ALT1! Just one comment: in the table of page 429, for the Event 660320 (Ruwenzori earthquake), there's a 7.0 moment magnitude [1], while Zana & Tanaka's 1981 review at the end of page 120, in "The Mt. Ruwenzori Region" section gives M 6.7-7 [2] as does the National Geophysical Data Center (magnitude 6.75-7), but we're keeping the precise value of Mw 6.8 of the most up to date (2009) source [3] on page 66 (as cited in the article). Empathictrust (talk) 15:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)