Talk:2011 Japanese nuclear accidents

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Japan: History Mid‑importance Mid This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This redirect is supported by the History task force. WikiProject Japan to do list: edit history watch purge Peer review: Kako River (Japan) A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Pure Japanese, Vinland Saga (TV series), Japanese destroyer Ume (1944), Mai Fujisawa, Godzilla Minus One Add requested images to articles that need them. Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions. Improve and expand Japan-related stubs. Create some requested articles. Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English. Assess unassessed articles Energy Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. 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

	Environment

}}

shouldn't this be 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami related nuclear incidents and accident ? As there can be unrelated 2011 nuclear incidents/accidents. 184.144.160.156 (talk) 13:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They shouldn't have split the disaster page in the first page, I voted against it, and this current page shows what was wrong with that decision. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

maybe rename the page to "2011 Japan Nuclear Crisis" or something and then move all the nuclear releated stuff from the main page to this one? TheApplePi (talk) 04:38, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png needs the following changes:

• The timezone is incorrect – should be JST instead of PT (FIXED - also fixed File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311-de.png, File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311-cs.png, and File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311-rm.png)
• The date format is DD.MM.YYYY – for the English Wikipedia, should be MM/DD/YYYY or 11 March 2011 or 11 Mar. 2011 (FIXED)
• The magnitude is 9,0 – for the English Wikipedia, should be 9.0

The English Wikipedia version needs a separate file, perhaps named File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311 EN.png, because File:JAPAN EARTHQUAKE 20110311.png is widely used in non-English Wikipedias where the date and magnitude format is correct (but the timezone still needs to be corrected).

Obankston (talk) 01:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the entire world speaks American, when speaking English is required. MM/DD/YYYY is American. "11 March 2011" would make no assumption of being American though. 184.144.166.85 (talk) 05:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Such a list may need to have sub-categories. Such as:

• 1) Cities and Towns under long-term evacuation orders (there are some near the nuclear plants like this).
• 2) Towns under short-term (or unknown time-frame) evacuation orders.
• 3) Towns under "stay indoors" restrictions.
• 4) Towns and cities that have had radiation alerts (includes Tokyo, which had a 24 hour alert not to give city water to infants).

173.246.35.185 (talk) 12:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever you make a wikilink to a section of an article, and name it a single title and put it in a table I find it misleading in the highest. The only point of this article is to provide links on what articles Wikipedia has on the subjects, but the links do not have an article for them and this is misrepresentation that users will only discover by clicking the links. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit was reverted without discussion. See the introductory sentence.

This is a list of articles describing...

This is not a list of articles describing those things. This page is a disingenuous portrayal which circumvents the ordinary editing rules by being navigational in function and does not meet the standards of Wikipedia. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There has been so many accidents and incidents that it is difficult to keep track of them all. But I think this article does quite a good job, and titles are descriptive and useful. Johnfos (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article follows the Wikipedia standards described in Category:Indexes of articles, not the standards of a regular article. Obankston (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Fukushima Daichi fits the definition of an "accident". If I am not looking where I am going and drive a bulldozer through my house, that is an accident. If my house is hit by a meteorite, that isn't. Fukushima fits rather into the second category - there is no agency involved, deliberate or otherwise, it was just a natural disaster. 94.193.35.68 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]