Talk:Dead man zone
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jmcgint.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Merge
editI'm suggesting this be merged into Bushfire. It's stubby on its own with a generic stub tag. --Happynoodleboy 15:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I approve this merge. I was trying to figure out how to stub-sort it and I couldn't come up with anything. The merge seems logical. Amalas 17:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if a merge with Bushfire is appropriate, because although it is integrated with bushfires, The dead man zone is also a subject of its own. However, as the creator of this article I wouldn't fight a merge with another subject... perhaps something to do with fire research? Mazzone 08:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose merge
editThis article has the potential to expand, and the term is not exclusive to bushfires (ie fires in New Zealand, Oz and New Caledonia) -- oppose the merge User:Pedant 16:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Oppose merge - the Dead Man Zone is a highly specific and very important characteristic of bushfire behaviour. It has been the subject of significant research and reccomendations. The article certainly has scope for expansion - description of the concept of Dead Man Zone, cases of fatalities, actions taken by firefighters to avoid "dead man zone", etc.--ABVS 10:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Capitalization
editAny thoughts on the way this article is capitalized? Since it's not a proper noun, normally it would be lower case (Dead man zone). I suspect that in the firefighting literature it is often upper case, but I don't think it should be in a general encyclopedia. It's had this capitalization since the article was started in 2005, so I thought I'd check here before changing it. If there is no objection, I'll make the change here and in the template in a week or so. Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 18:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)