Talk:2018 Osaka earthquake

Intensity and magnitude

This earthquake has been reported by some news websites as 6.1 magnitude, but this appears to be a misunderstanding of the JMA intensity scale as a maximum intensity of 6.1 has also been reported. Unless we have a reliable source that uses 6.1 for the magnitude, then we should probably use the USGS 5.3 Mw value. Mikenorton (talk) 14:21, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Looking again on the JMA website, it shows the magnitude as 5.9, but another page shows it as 6.1 instead, although it's not obvious to me what scale they use. Mikenorton (talk) 15:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

The 6.1 magnitude published by JMA is indeed M_jma, not Mw, which is also distinct from the JMA's shindo intensity scale. The 5.9 figure on their website was the preliminary value, which was later updated to 6.1. See the JMA's Japanese press bulletin which says: "マグニチュード: 6.1（暫定値；速報値5.9から更新)," which in English means "Magnitude: 6.1 (provisional figure, updated from initial 5.9 figure)." Y phelan (talk) 05:58, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying and updating the article. Mikenorton (talk) 09:17, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Location of earthquake

The current intro reads that the earthquake struck the city of Osaka, Japan. It might be more accurate to say that it struck Osaka Prefecture or near Osaka, since Takatsuki (which is not part of the city) is somewhat of a distance (20 km) from Osaka city proper. Plus, the epicenter is roughly the same distance from Kyoto as well, so I'm not sure if its the best idea to identify the city of Osaka uniquely as the location of the earthquake, when there's another major city that's almost just as close. Y phelan (talk) 15:07, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Osaka Prefecture seems the best option. Mikenorton (talk) 15:13, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Emergency shutdown of nuclear power plants

did that happen? --Itu (talk) 06:10, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Foreigner crimes

One unsubstantiated article about foreigners maybe committing crimes (based of anti-foreigner hate-speech on Twitter) doesn't seem to justify having this inflammatory statement in the article. Even the article itself doubts whether the crimes occurred or not. Wikipedia is not a place for rumours. Removed. Paullb (talk) 03:12, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

However, if the rumors are covered by a reliable source, they are notable. They were also covered in SCMP, and acknowledged in an editorial in the Asahi Shimbun, the second-largest newspaper in the country. I think that this is sufficient for inclusion, so I am restoring the paragraph and expanding it. SounderBruce 06:14, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I think that gives it a much more balanced and accurate tone. Let's leave it like this Paullb (talk) 08:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)