Talk:Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai

A fact from Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 March 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that a sub-marine eruption near the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai volcano in Tonga began spewing steam, smoke, pumice, and ash thousands of feet into the sky on March 16, 2009? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/March.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Volcanoes Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects 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.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. inactive .SeamountsWikipedia:WikiProject SeamountsTemplate:WikiProject SeamountsSeamounts articles

Polynesia: Tonga Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia 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.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tonga (assessed as Mid-importance).

	Islands
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Google Scholar

• New island being created right now, here is some more information on it (to be added to the article soon) - http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/tongan-volcano-creates-new-island-150117.htm Skycycle (talk) 16:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most of that information is already in the article. But if there's something new, please add away! - Tim1965 (talk) 18:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Bit more stuff here in the BBC article EdwardLane (talk) 09:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sat photos could be updated since new center cone is now above sea level (20/8/2015) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevymtnz (talk • contribs) 08:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to edit-war the lead of this article. First, the existing grammar is fine. If the article were about an island chain, it would be proper to say "the island of Skye in the Inner Hebrides." But Tonga is not an island chain; it is a nation. Moreover, not all readers will be aware of what Tonga is. Therefore, it would be correct to say "the nation of Tonga". Using "in" to describe Tonga is ambiguous; that implies "interior". Second, it is perfectly reasonable to include an alternative name for the island in the lead. A vast number of Wikipedia articles do so.

To edit war, and to be rude about it, is not appropriate. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1. an alternative name of this island would be relevant. An alternative name of a different island is not.
2. one does not need to cater to ignorance. You assume the reader has a basic education when writing an encyclopaedia. If a reader is in fact not aware of what Tonga is, they click on the link and find out. 101.98.126.25 (talk) 22:15, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should we change the classification from volcano to island?BigRed606 (talk) 22:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I vote no. https://unosat-maps.web.cern.ch/TO/VO20220115TON/UNOSAT_Preliminary_Assessment_Report_TC20220115TON_17Jan2022.pdf D401199f6e (talk) 07:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reported heard in Alaska and confirmed by NWS. Also Barometer changes in New Jersey

https://twitter.com/NWSAlaska/status/1482431322740060162?s=20 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.9.246.133 (talk) 03:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• View from summit of HTHH in June 2017, Damien Grouille.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling is inconsistent, sometimes we use an okina and sometimes not. I'm not familiar with the language, but Tongan language says it should be okina, in which case the article should be moved. Either way, we should spell it the same throughout the article. GA-RT-22 (talk) 22:37, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As per

MOS:CONFORM

). The symbols ′ and ″ seen in edit window dropdowns are prime and double-prime; these are used to indicate subdivisions of the degree, but not as apostrophes or quote marks.

Google results reported 960,000 of "Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha'apai" vs 37,900 of "Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai", HurricaneEdgar 05:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is a case of

MOS:CURLY, HurricaneEdgar – we're not talking about quotation marks here, we're talking about a specific letter in many Polynesian languages, which in this instance would be known as the fakauʻa (but which Wikipedia has at its Hawaiian name of ʻOkina). We should be making an effort where possible to reflect the correct spelling of the volcano, fakauʻa and all. Turnagra (talk) 10:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@HurricaneEdgar: - as the user who has reverted the last two attempts to use the fakauʻa / ʻokina, I'm wondering if you would like to weigh in on this before I make a move to use the proper spelling of the volcano? Turnagra (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Turnagra: Thank you for moving this back. MOS:CURLY does not apply here, since fakauʻa / ʻokina is not a quote mark (see Quotation mark and the Unicode spec). It would help if either of Wikiprojects Polynesia or Tonga had a style guide to make this explicit, as does Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Hawaii-related articles. I brought this up once at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tonga but got no takers. GA-RT-22 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The January 2022 is described as "As powerful as the 1883 Krakatoa eruption in Indonesia" which was VEI-6, yet the current eruption is rated only at VEI-5, which is the rate of AD 79 eruption of Vesuvius and the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens. זור987 (talk) 14:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As it currently stands, Global Volcanism Program have assigned it as a VEI-5. From what I've heard this is a preliminary estimate and not necessarily the final value. Most estimates have it at the high end of 5 or low end of 6. If GVP later upgrades it to a VEI-6 then we can change it, but otherwise it has to remain as a VEI-5 on here. Mrmp2402 (talk) 10:34, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should 2009 Tonga undersea volcanic eruption be merged into this article's History section? Given that article is very brief and overshadowed by the 2022 eruption, I don't really think it is justified to keep it on its own page. Discuss at Talk:2009 Tonga undersea volcanic eruption#Merger proposal Mrmp2402 (talk) 23:16, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think its a good idea to leave alone. Need space in the main article for the hopefully more minor eruptions to come and decreases scroll time. And at the time it was for some of us an interesting eruption and at the time of the 2022 eruption helped identify that a fair number of South Pacific volcano articles were of indifferent quality. ChaseKiwi (talk) 22:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that it's probably worth an article in its own right. It could be touched on in the same way that the 2022 eruption is, with a link pointing to the main article, but a volcano having a bigger eruption doesn't mean other eruptions should lose their articles. It'd be better to try and expand the current articles than to merge them because they don't have enough. Turnagra (talk) 10:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked into this more, yes I definitely agree that it should be left alone and we can work on expanding that article. Also could consider making a new article for the 2014-2015 eruption. Plenty of reporting on the GVP website https://volcano.si.edu/volcano.cfm?vn=243040&vtab=Bulletin Mrmp2402 (talk) 10:38, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Been wondering if some of this material may be worth adding to this article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]