Talk:2017 Puebla earthquake

SASMEX Advance Warning: the alert didn't really activated until 24 sec after initial detection

The initial section claims that SASMEX was able to give 20 seconds advance warning before the earthquake hit Mexico City. This didn't happen, the "Public Alert" wasn't activated until seconds after the quake actually started. The following video shows that the actual alert wasn't activated until 24 seconds after initial detection. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tAVty-PvBw Danixdefcon5 (talk) 01:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

pdf

• https://earthquake.usgs.gov/realtime/product/losspager/us2000ar20/us/1505848038633/alertfatal.pdf
• https://earthquake.usgs.gov/realtime/product/losspager/us2000ar20/us/1505848038633/alertecon.pdf

--Itu (talk) 19:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

map switching

That implementation is very ugly. It should not use buttons, and at least they should align left. --Itu (talk) 21:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Background section

I added an image, but its caption might need work. -Mardus /talk 22:17, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge with the first earthquake from 11 days ago

This one would not have been so lethal if that one had not weakened the buildings before — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granito diaz (talk • contribs) 02:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

The other earthquake was way to the south, so that's very dubious. Regardless, a merge is definitely not warranted. These are two distinct earthquakes that affected different areas. Master of Time (talk) 04:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

 Not done - appears to be a distinct event that isn't the same as this one. -- Fuzheado | Talk 16:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

?!

"In Mexico City, 22 of the fatalities occurred at the Enrique C. Rébsamen school, where the bodies of 26 students and four instructors were pulled from the rubble..." — This does not make much sense. By my reckoning, this means that 30 bodies were recovered at Enrique C. Rébsamen; so how could it be that they represent "22 of the fatalities"? Perhaps this has been updated clumsily? Kelisi (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

The "Aftershocks" section

This section only contains three graphics which, if I read the attributions correctly, were created by the submitter.

Doesn't that fall under "original research" which Wikipedia (or most of its editors) does not like to see in any entry/article?

Just curious. 2600:8800:786:A300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 06:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

The relevant policy says "Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments, the core reason behind the NOR policy." --Joshualouie711^talk 23:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

mexico aerthquake 2017

61 deaths — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:120B:2C4A:69D0:34B3:4D2A:7E98:2B0A (talk) 13:14, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Death toll

The article refers to 370 deaths in the lead section and the infobox and 371 in the table in the "Casualties" section. Most sources that I can find give 369 deaths as the total, including the AP source for citation #5. To complicate matters, the AP article breaks the total down into individual figures that add up to 370. The table is cited (#26) to a tweet from Luis Felipe Puente of the Proteccion Civil which gives a total of 361 and is clearly not the source for the figures shown. The difference between the 369 and 370 figure appears to be the number of fatalities in Morelos, either 74 or 75 depending on source. I am still trying to find a definitive breakdown, but no luck so far. I can say that there is virtually no support in reliable sources for 371 deaths, so we may have to live with a range. There is also even more variation in the number of injured, between 6,000 and over 7,000. I'll keep digging. Mikenorton (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2021 (UTC)