Talk:2016 Ecuador earthquake

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2016 Ecuador earthquake article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A news item involving 2016 Ecuador earthquake was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 17 April 2016.

Wikipedia

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Earthquakes Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of earthquakes, seismology, plate tectonics, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ecuador Low‑importance

	Ecuador portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ecuador, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ecuador on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EcuadorWikipedia:WikiProject EcuadorTemplate:WikiProject EcuadorEcuador articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TA2016.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Premature?[edit]

Do we have evidence that this was a destructive event? Dawnseeker2000 01:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. [1] Yahoo! News has info related to bridges and buildings being damaged. This is a brand new article, give it time. Thanks! Juneau Mike (talk) 02:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's better to wait on article creation until we know that the event is notable for some reason. This one was created before that was known. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 02:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not familiar with the editor who created this article, and perhaps it was created a bit hasty. But reports of damage are coming in now. Not that you are suggesting taking this AfD, but since the article is here I humbly suggest allowing it to develop. A 7.7 0r 7.8 with damage to buildings and roads will be notable. I concur with you that this article was created perhaps too quickly. But with reports coming in now of damage, I believe notability will be established. Juneau Mike (talk) 02:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quickly, schmickly. An earthquake is an earthquake is an earthquake, and a 7.8 is indubitably notable. I put up the article, having survived the Loma Prieta Earthquake, which was a 6.9er... The numbers alone tell the tale. kencf0618 (talk) 02:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, magnitude alone does not tell the story. I lived in Aptos for a while as well! Dawnseeker2000 02:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are getting harder numbers now about infrastructure damage and deaths, so the article is shaping up nicely. Definitely notable. kencf0618 (talk) 02:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Large magnitude earthquakes are not always notable (I'm frequently successful in deleting articles on large non-notable events). Please wait next time until solid information is available (so that we lessen the chance of having to go through an unnecessary AfD). Dawnseeker2000 02:58, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The USGS automated alert system predicted 100-1000 deaths. Wikipedia:WikiProject Earthquakes has a guideline that most earthquakes >7.0 are notable. Sure, these things could be wrong, but there was plenty of reason to believe this was going to be notable. It would be silly to wait simply because of a small chance this might end up at AFD. Dragons flight (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They can be a lot of work, so no, not silly. You misread the guideline. Dawnseeker2000 03:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, AFDs actually aren't that much work. Shrug. Anyway, unless you currently believe this isn't notable, I think it is clear that there isn't a problem here. Dragons flight (talk) 03:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not once did I say that it was not notable. Dawnseeker2000 03:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quakes overview[edit]

From http://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/eqinfo/list.php. --Itu (talk) 07:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Origin Time                    Latitude Longitude     Depth                   Flinn-Engdahl Region Name(*1)
UTC 	                Mag    degrees  degrees         km
2016-04-16 23:47:42 	4.5 	0.34°N 	79.88°W 	10 	C 		Near Coast of Ecuador

2016-04-16 23:58:36 	7.7 	0.46°N 	79.84°W 	10 	C 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 00:29:32 	5.3 	0.23°S 	80.35°W 	10 	C 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 02:18:00 	4.8 	0.15°S 	80.31°W 	10 	C 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 03:05:33 	4.6 	0.46°N 	80.06°W 	10 	C 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 04:02:08 	4.7 	0.13°S 	80.54°W 	10 	C 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 07:13:59 	5.7 	0.37°S 	80.20°W 	19 	C 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 09:23:40 	5.6 	0.20°S 	80.62°W 	10 	C 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-17 21:35:19 	4.4 	0.82°S 	80.24°W 	21 	M 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-18 18:38:13 	5.4 	0.91°S 	80.72°W 	20 	M 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-18 19:12:39 	4.6 	0.80°S 	80.73°W 	10 	A 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-18 21:15:53 	5.2 	0.03°N 	80.75°W 	10 	M 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-19 02:03:16 	4.9 	0.10°S 	80.62°W 	10 	A 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-19 17:13:00 	4.5 	1.22°S 	80.67°W 	46 	M 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-19 22:22:25 	5.6 	0.62°N 	79.96°W 	10 	C 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-20 08:25:06 	4.6 	0.71°N 	80.28°W 	10 	A 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-20 08:33:46 	6.1 	0.76°N 	80.12°W 	10 	C 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-20 09:13:16 	4.7 	0.63°N 	80.01°W 	10 	M 		Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-04-20 11:23:23 	4.8 	0.13°S 	80.40°W 	10 	A 		Near Coast of Ecuador


2016-05-18 07:57:02 	6.6 	0.45°N 	79.83°W 	22 	M 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador
2016-05-18 16:46:43 	6.8 	0.44°N 	79.70°W 	29 	M 	MT 	Near Coast of Ecuador

(*1):Flinn–Engdahl regions

USGS[edit]

Mag	date/time	id/link	location	coordinates
4.8	2016-04-16 23:47:44 (UTC)	us20005j2w	21.0 km (13.0 mi) N of Pedernales, Ecuador	0.277°N 80.074°W	depth=33.0 km (20.5 mi)
7.8	2016-04-16 23:58:37 (UTC)	us20005j32	27.0 km (16.8 mi) SSE of Muisne, Ecuador	0.371°N 79.940°W	depth=19.2 km (11.9 mi)
4.6	2016-04-17 20:24:01 (UTC)	us20005ja5	15.0 km (9.3 mi) ESE of Muisne, Ecuador	0.570°N 79.900°W	depth=10.0 km (6.2 mi)

Aftermath and Reactions[edit]

Here are some sources to document both topics:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/world/americas/in-remote-ecuador-towns-hit-by-quake-contact-was-cut-off-for-days.html?partner=msft_msn&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/nyregion/quakes-aftershocks-come-to-ecuadoreans-in-queens.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FEcuador

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/04/18/death-toll-ecuador-quake-rises-350-ap/83177750/

Leo Bonilla (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aftershocks[edit]

there have been many but no update here. A massive one a few hours ago "2016-04-22 03:03:44.0 UTC" of 6.0 but 30km below.Lihaas (talk) 06:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to complete and update the above lists and the article. --Itu (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update and citation[edit]

The death toll and injury stats are being updated, but the citations are not. For example, the article might state the death toll has reached 507. But, if I click the citation, it might say the death toll is 272. 206.8.2.171 (talk) 15:43, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update Lihaas (talk) 06:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath[edit]

Added information from these two articles

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/23/ecuador-earthquake-death-toll-rises-rafael-correa

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/21/ecuador-earthquake-survivors-food-shortages-water-medical-aid

TA2016 (talk) 10:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2016 Ecuador earthquake. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160417073345/http://abc7.com/news/78-magnitude-earthquake-hits-near-ecuador-according-to-usgs/1295047/ to http://abc7.com/news/78-magnitude-earthquake-hits-near-ecuador-according-to-usgs/1295047/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ibtimes.com/ecuador-earthquake-death-toll-soars-aftershocks-reported-2355035

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]