Talk:2014 Shanghai stampede

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:2014 Shanghai crush)

Excellent Article[edit]

I was there about 100 meters from the worst of it when it occurred. And, I find this article to be an excellent account of what actually occurred. I was at that time a factory software consultant for Apple Inc.; and I was staying at a hotel at near the Bund when I decided to attend the fireworks display. Other than bruising of my ribs from the crush of the moving crowd I sustained no injuries. There was a noticeable absence of Police official which probably was the single biggest cause of the disaster. My condolences to anyone who lost family members at this event. -- (Steve Ussery). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aletheia (talk • contribs) 16:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Stampede" vs, "crush"[edit]

"Stampede" is extremely misleading, as it is defined as the running over. In many such events, it is rather the crush points due to fluid-like motions of standing people. This article goes in-depth why. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/02/07/crush-point This video shows the fluid motions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxd_KlaCiNY I am sorry that I don't know enough about Wikipedia formatting to properly date-sign this comment or integrate it below, if that is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.231.153.60 (talk) 16:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man and Masem: I think this is the right place for this. I wasn't going to say anymore, but apparently the discussion's not over with according to you. It's simple, a lot more sources (like I posted above) use "stampede" than "crush", not just some. I found few sources that said crush, when compared to "stampede". I cited seven,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7] you two cited two. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just wait a few hours and find out? The BBC report says there's no clear reason given yet, other than the victims were killed in a crush. And a quick Google search makes it clear that there's no real solution yet. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:29, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if you feel I wasn't being calm, really. I don't mean to sound incivil. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:31, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised to see the article with "crush" in the title. I was searching for the article as "2014 Shanghai stampede". I've not heard of a crush before, actually. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't either. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Stampede, stampede, stampede, stampede... ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Crush" (or "Crowd crush") is used more when you are not talking about a fast-moving/panicked crowd. See [8] for example. That said, the details of why these people were killed are yet known. --MASEM (t) 23:51, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
'Stampede' sounds strange to my ear when talking about people. That's what cattle do. At any rate, it would imply a fast-moving crowd, and I can't see any evidence that that was the case as yet. GoldenRing (talk) 00:05, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that the page has been moved a couple times since my initial move. I had thought 'stampede' was uncontroversial, since the article creator explicitly gave permission for the move. Any future moves should be done by a controversial request for move so a consensus can be formally achieved according to WP:TITLE. Mamyles (talk) 00:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Crush' refers to the way the victims actually died. Shouldn't it be written as "35 crushed to death...in a stampede?" I'm British and we use the term stampede on a frequent basis. It's valid, as long as there was a 'stampede'. I'm an English teacher in China (admittedly a pre-school and under 10s one!) and we use US-English as standard. So...Somchai Sun (talk) 00:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I prefer stampede for this event. The cause of death may well be crush injuries, but the proximate cause was a stampede. Previous usage on Wikipedia: 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede, 2009 Houphouët-Boigny stampede, 2008 Jodhpur stampede, dozens more; for "crush", none. Abductive (reasoning) 02:46, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • As far as I can see from reliable sources, there is no evidence that this was a stampede (there were no animals involved, there were no reports of people running or moving at high speed). People were killed by a crush of other people it seems. In the articles you explicitly link to people were actually killed by fast moving crowds, so their use of "stampede" does not imply this article is correct. 5.179.100.129 (talk) 08:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Many reliable sources use "stampede". [9] WWGB (talk) 08:46, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The word Crush is normally not used to describe such an event, nor do people say 'x' were crushed. Stampede is indeed the right term. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What term does English language media in China use? –HTD 11:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bund stampede kills 36, injures 47 (Shanghaidaily.com). WWGB (talk) 11:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shanghai New Year stampede kills 36 (China Daily) --E8xE8 (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My contribution: New Year celebrations cancelled in Shanghai after 36 die in riverfront stampede (South China Morning Post). I looked at SCMP as that's from Hong Kong, which should presumably prefer BrE over AmE. –HTD 11:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stampede, stampede, and the winner is stampede. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But if a crush event where nobody is running qualifies as a stampede, then the definition of stampede needs to be changed. OTOH compare the 2010 Duisburg Love Parade disaster where apparently a decision was made not to call it a stampede, because: A 2012 scientific analysis of the causes of the disaster dismissed the earlier descriptions of the incident as stampede or crowd panic, and instead found evidence for a phenomenon called "crowd turbulence".[10]. The Shanghai photos and accounts seem to indicate that as in Duisburg, people were immobilized and crushed, but there was no running. Of course it's too early to tell. --92.77.136.148 (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stampede says "A stampede is an act of mass impulse among herd animals or a crowd of people in which the herd (or crowd) collectively begins running with no clear direction or purpose." There are stampedes of people who ran towards the exit/s; that's clearly not "running with no clear direction or purpose", yet those were called as "stampedes" too.
The key word there is "begins". Just because the crowd didn't run doesn't mean they weren't trying to run. Abductive (reasoning) 21:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, the SCMP source I added above also used the word "crush" throughout the article. Perhaps in most varieties of English, "stampede" means "crush" in English. At least in China and the U.S. Probably the same for our Indian guy Rsrikanth05.
Either way, we shouldn't move it to any other name unless reliable sources had clearly deviated from "stampede" into some other term. –HTD 13:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rsrikanth05: "nor do people say 'x' were crushed." is complete nonsense. Of course people say "x were crushed" or "x were crushed to death". And yes, the BBC uses the term crush, as do many other reliable sources if you just take one second to Google it. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

People don't get crushed by people. People get crushed by machines, or something that isn't alive. If it is living then it normally trampled. But then, it doesn't seem to matter to you does it? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You just aren't getting it are you? Take a look at Hillsborough disaster for example. "human crush". Deal with it. Or simply Google "crushed to death" and see minor publications like Wall Street Journal and The Independent use that exact phrase. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Googled. News sites that use "stampede" in the title: New York Times, Washington Post, The Star, Fox News, NPR, Sun Times, Huffington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, Financial Times, Yahoo News, Daily Mail. Use of "crush": BBC, The Independent, The Japan Times. About everyone says "X were crushed in the stampede", not "X were killed in the crush". --AmaryllisGardener talk 17:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no word for it because people prefer to imagine the phenomenon doesn't exist. "Crowd disaster" might be the general term, if there was one. zzz (talk) 07:09, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The people died of compressive asphyxiation or being squeezed tight and can't breath. The people weren't moving enough to get trampled, they were just too tightly packed. Crowd crush is a way to die from a stampede as is getting trampled. Qwesar (talk) 02:48, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Video reference[edit]

I had added a video link under external references, as it illustrates the crowd turbulence in an educative way. The video was removed. I'm leaving the link here for some more Wikipedia-knowledgeable people to decide it if has a place or not (it may not): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDt7lMvM0EQ& 93.231.146.164 (talk) 09:05, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Intro[edit]

Some IP keeps adding the title of the article in bold in to the introduction of the article. Is it really required? It kind of makes the intro look funny. -_Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crowd behavior[edit]

Please add links to WP articles about crowd behavior.

Why did these people stampede needlessly and thus kill themselves? Why didn't they just stop moving? Do people in different countries/cultures act differently in such circumstances? How can individuals recognize and avoid such potentially dangerous situations? How can individuals best act if caught in such a situation?-71.174.175.150 (talk) 14:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's already an article about Crowd psychology where these questions can be discussed. Most likely it has nothing to do with culture since there are examples in every cultures (though logically it's more likely to happen in crowded countries like China or India). Laurent (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for the stampede is not yet known (investigations currently taking place). And Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a advice column. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 14:49, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crowd behavior is an appropriate encyclopaedia topic. This incident is not unique and separate; understanding the general subject would be very relevant and useful.-71.174.175.150 (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Injured count[edit]

The number of severely injured people is now 10, down from 13. I've updated it in the lead, but I'm not sure if it's intended to show the initial count. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 07:58, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The count is now 9. As I'm not confident enough to make the change, could someone else do it if appropriate? http://news.163.com/15/0103/15/AF1U8GNK00014AEE.html Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 08:10, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note that I've added that separately. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 02:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cause[edit]

I live in shanghai and I heard the cause of the death was the shanghai tower. Visitors crammed together to see the lights of the shanghai tower and they choked to death because of the pressure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.220.35.78 (talk) 10:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We need reliable sources to prove that claim. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 11:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2014_Shanghai_stampede&oldid=1196670377"