Talk:Kerry bog slides

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

Sept 2008 posts[edit]

Captainbeefart thinks you are taking the piss.... Captainbeefart (talk) 14:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think so too. This page has to be a joke. "one of the most frightening and overwhelming events ever witnessed" means 2 people didn't get hurt, but might have been if they were not at a wedding...??? plus no link or explanation on what a "bogslide" actually IS. That, at least, could be educational. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.85.101.75 (talk) 17:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is a bogslide?[edit]

I thought bogs were in low-lying areas; where do they slide to? If there is a general concept of “bogslide,” someone ought to write an article about that first, or at least put a brief explanation in this one. — crism (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would expect that a bogslide is much as we Americans would call a landslide. The fact that an area is a bog does not make it the lowest lying land in the area, although that is often the case. A bog is defined by the material it contains, not by its topography.Ptrask 16:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptrask (talk • contribs)

Well it's certainly provoked debate on the term "bogslide". I was surprised to find it didn't have an article given that I first heard of it during my schooldays. But I guess it's one of those areas that aren't considered important on Wikipedia because it doesn't affect the US. :) --Candlewicke (Talk) 21:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It probably should have an article. Here is an excellent paper on the subject, [1]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brilliantine (talk • contribs) 22:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Excellent. :) Bogslides do exist after all. --Candlewicke (Talk) 12:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Tag?[edit]

I'm not sure who had marked this for deletion, but I believe that it is certainly notable. I went in to remove the deletion tag, and it had already been removed. Also, I changed a heading that said "Bogslide One" as there was no subsequent "Bobslide Two". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptrask (talk • contribs) 16:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-- This might be notable for the few people involved, but it does not meet the Wikipedia proposed guidelines for notable events(see wp:EVENT). This is a local news story that had absolutely no impact apart from the motorists who were inconvenienced. Here's what the proposed guidelines say:

"Natural disasters are only notable if they significantly affect the region which they strike, resulting in heavily-reported death or damage. Not every earthquake, storm, or meteorite landing that destroys just a few houses can be worthy of an article." As not even one house was destroyed, I don't think this meets the criteria for "notable." Also: "A news event is notable if it receives significant, continual coverage in sources with national or global scope. Local news stories are rarely notable, and only if their coverage demonstrates prime importance."

I don't see the prime importance of a bogslide that closed a road and killed no one. Dzhastin 18:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Multiple issues[edit]

The article is overly dramatic and out of character for almost any place on Wikipedia. It reads like something written by a high schooler for a high school newsletter. It is sort of newsy but only for the folks in Kerry.

25 acres is not a lot of land to be disturbed. Sure, the 66 year-old guy has it tough, but others have it tougher. Buck up, bucko!

The bogslide may be considered notable, but, for the most part, only by those involved. The people quoted are absolutely not notable in and of themselves. DZhastin has the right WP:EVENT referenced.

As User:59.85.101.75 said, "the most frightening" event is not! Like the cited article's headline reads: "Locals in awe of nature". That's the real issue. Yeah, this landslide might've frightened someone who has never had an adventurous life. However, I do think that the Krakatoa volcano explosion -- or any number of other historic events (pick any one out of Wikipedia) could very easily have been more frightening by several orders of magnitude. Heck, the quote isn't even attributable to anyone!

A windfarm built in 2004 contributed to this 2008 event? Possible, not likely.

Clean this up or delete it ... please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk • contribs) 20:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some cleanup on the article (mostly removing the drama) just in case it is decided to keep it. Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 16:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WAKE UP GUYS!!!!!![edit]

Beefart repeats: the author is having a lend of you. As in ROTFLPIMP.... Chuckle for a day or so and then get rid of it.... Captainbeefart (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An explanation of sorts[edit]

OK. First of all. A quote.

"Up to 30,000 people in north Kerry were left without a water supply due to polluted water courses and threatened reservoirs." [2]

That line is referenced by an article from The Irish Times, a national newspaper with no special relationship with County Kerry. 30,000 people is a lot of people, certainly by Irish standards. So a highly regarded national newspaper has reported that 30,000 people have been affected by this occurence. Another reference in the article is from national broadcaster RTÉ, whose news bulletin was how I first came to hear of this.

This article may not be up to everyone's taste but that seems to be because most of the inclination to use local sources which I thought would be a good place to start. There are many national sources available which I have not had time to complete but I thought the inclusion of at least one source from a national newspaper and a national broadcaster would at least appease those who are opposed such "local" events whilst serving to remind that there are easily other references available.

"A news event is notable if it receives significant, continual coverage in sources with national or global scope." Well it certainly received significant, continual coverage in sources with national scope.

Of course the article needs tidying up but I have never claimed that it was perfect. If I used any lines that appeared exaggerated or extreme they were marked with a reference number directly afterwards. After all, it is not a matter of my opinion, I was just referring to what was said in the aftermath of the event.

The idea that the bogslide (a word I have not made up - it is used in the references and is taught in geography classes in schools across the country) closed one road and therefore is not notable is wrong as, if the article were read again, it would become quite clear that much more damage than the closure of one road was caused. --Candlewicke (Talk) 17:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I'm the anonymous user from the top. I apologize for thinking it was a "joke". However, I think this article should be deleted. Just to take my country of Japan as an example, we have about 1000 Earthquakes per year, this Summer there were several deaths and widespread major property damage: but they do not get Wikipedia articles even on the Japanese Wikipedia unless there is something really notable about them. For example if this bogslide was the first recorded landslide type event ever to happen in Ireland, or caused massive economic damage, or something like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.85.101.75 (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand totally your point about earthquakes and that they happen fairly often in Japan but bogslides don't happen that often even in Ireland. If they did they would be reported but I certainly don't hear of them even annually. Earthquakes, hurricanes etc. are reported on a frequent basis even in areas where they do not occur so naturally such events seem a bit repetitive and not very notable. But this type of occurrence is not reported anywhere near as frequently as earthquakes are and one of my points is that it being as unusual as it is ought to only enhance its notability and worthiness of inclusion in an encyclopedia. --Candlewicke (Talk) 12:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bogslide or bog slide?[edit]

There are 9 instances of "bogslide" and 6 of "bog slide" in this article. Even the lead sentence conflicts with the title just above it. Would someone please make it consistent? I'm not familiar with the term either way. - Gorthian (talk) 17:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Kerry bog slides. 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:

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) 19:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kerry_bog_slides&oldid=1202152506"