Talk:2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on March 11, 2011. |
 | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 11, 2013, March 11, 2021, and March 11, 2023. |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami was copied or moved into Aftermath of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami with this edit on 07:45 1 April 2011. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
 | On 11 March 2011, it was proposed that this article be moved to 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. The result of the discussion was 'Moved' (see discussion; reason was "After long discussions, the German Wikipedia decided to change the name from "Sendai earthquake" to "Tōhoku earthquake", because the official name in Japanese refers to the region Tōhoku (Northeast). Sendai is a large city in that region, but not the city closest to the center of the quake. In addition, the city Sendai was not affected as severely as many other cities, particularly those affected by the tsunami."). |
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Wonky image problem
editTesting here:
Request to remove section that doesn't make sense
editIn Casualties > Japan > Key statistics, second paragraph, the first sentence ("Elderly aged over 60 account for 65.8% of all deaths, as shown on the table to the right.") makes sense. But the rest of that paragraph is completely unrelated both to that leading sentence and to the whole section. Apparently someone wanted to highlight a sentimental piece made by some random journalist in the Guardian about one particular incident, but it shouldn't be mentioned here. The Okawa thing is already mentioned and linked elsewhere in the article (in the subsection Others) and in that case thankfully without such loaded and opinionated language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.229.69.102 (talk) 07:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
Geology Map
editIn the geology section there is a two leaf map labeled, "Mechanism of 2011 Tohoku earthquake" Both panels make reference to "the North American Plate" sitting adjacent to this geographical section of Japan. I believe this is grossly incorrect, Japan does not sit on any piece of the North American Plate. Both map panels need serious revision. Astrophysicalchemist (talk) 13:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that it probably should have been labelled as the okhotsk microplate, however I don't think there is a consensus on whether it is fully its own thing. If someone has a similar graphic with better labelling then I would support its replacement, but I don't see the need for the current image's removal at the moment Vreee (talk) 01:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2024
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
it isn’t the fourth most powerful earthquake, its number 6 most powerful ever recorded. Timplin (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Not done: The article says it was the "fourth most powerful earthquake recorded in the world since modern seismography began in 1900" - this is correct, 2 of the more powerful quakes happened before this. Jamedeus (talk) 19:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
299%g should be XI, not VIII
editI was quite shocked when I saw VIII here along with 2.99g of PGA. USGS Estimations state that PGAs that exceed 1.39g should be considered as X-XII. So a rough estimate of it would be around XI-XII. Waitwott (talk) 07:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Furthermore, the Ishikawa earthquake had 2.88 g of PGA, yet it is considered X-XI. So how come did 3.11 have VIII even with nearly 3g of acceleration? And also, please separate the intensities to their respective blocks, instead of putting its counterpart in parentheses/brackets. Waitwott (talk) 07:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- The Ishikawa earthquake intensity was supported by a source [1]. The VIII intensity in this article is supported by the USGS event page impact summary. I haven't come across any credible source that suggests a different maximum Mercalli intensity. Interpreting the 2.99 g PGA would constitute WP:SYNTH. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 08:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2024
edit| | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "It lasted six minutes, causing a tsunami" to "It lasted six minutes and caused a tsunami." The former implies the length of time or severity of shaking caused the tsunami, but tsunamis are simply caused by the displacement of a large volume of water, regardless of how strong or long the shaking was. 2601:1C0:4D7C:6C00:DDF8:6226:A9B1:CB56 (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Done The two aren't completely unrelated - length of shaking relates to size of rupture, which relates to the amount of water displaced but I take your point, thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 08:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)