Talk:Torre Ejecutiva Pemex explosion

From the Spanish article

edit

I have added incident aftermath and timeline sections which are translated from the Spanish article. Can someone who knows how add the requisite template reflecting this? Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 19:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Added Template:Interwiki copy. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Timeline of poor references

edit

Please, oh please can we stop adding the mainly unreferenced "timeline" to this article, at least until it's no longer on the main page? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

What are you talking about? Except for the one single line marked reference needed every item is either refd in the timeline or in the body already. μηδείς (talk) 22:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, good call, 13 lines without in-line references, and a bunch of entirely messed up references added to an article on the main page of Wikipedia. Pure genius. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
edit

I noticed that the article uses the word "tweet" and related terms to refer to Twitter posts. I feel that this is non-neutral in a subtle way -- to fully understand this article, you must accept Twitter's marketing terminology. I would prefer more descriptive terms like "Twitter post" or "Twitter message". Does anyone know if there are any style guidelines pertaining to this? 138.16.21.199 (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I understand what you mean, however most major media outlets use the word "tweet" as the accepted terminology for a post on Twitter. -- LuK3 (Talk) 05:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Concur. If you don't know what a "tweet" is, then you likely don't know what Twitter is. Hiberniantears (talk) 06:59, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Three disappeared

edit

There are three people missing. Let's stay tuned. [1] ComputerJA (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Drug cartel

edit

So I'm hearing stories that authorities are withholding information that it was drug cartel related because it sheds light on the incompetence of the administrations "War on drugs". Any truth?

-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.169.187 (talk) 02:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Cause

edit

Preliminary reports indicate that gas accumulation was the cause of the explosion. [2] ComputerJA (talk) 03:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Terrible writing, awful article

edit

this: "The building was completely evacuated in the minutes following the explosion.[6] In the hours after the blast, about 30 people were reported to be trapped in debris,[6] and searches continued into the next day, as Pemex CEO Emilio Lozoya said there were indications that some people remained under the rubble.[7]"

is contradictory the building was EITHER "completely evacuated in the minutes following the explosion" OR "In the hours after the blast, about 30 people were reported to be trapped in debris"]

could do with a total rewrite too! 188.220.151.59 (talk) 15:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Misleading article title: The main tower was not involved at all

edit

This article must be revised to change its present title, as the main building (Tower) was not involved at all in the explosion. It needs to refer to "Edificio B-2" as this was the building affected by the explosion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.20 (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply