Wikipedia

Talk:June 2008 Midwest floods

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Move

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago11 comments3 people in discussion

Move has been reverted. No consensus was reached (in fact, moving it to include US in the title is the minority on this talk page). Please do not move the page unless a wide consensus is reached here. Thank you. -- MeHolla! 22:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Your revert has been reverted. There is no consensus to leave off the nation in the title. Please see: Wikipedia:POV#Local bias. Just saying Midwest could be confusing to those without a U.S.-centric mindset. --Tocino 02:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
There is no local bias. The Midwest is the only region on the planet known as "The Midwest". Nobody said Midwest Asia or Midwest Europe. The added "US" is not necessary, and as Davumaya has said, the local common name is the one that should be/will be used. Thank you, though. -- MeHolla! 10:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
You are wrong. The Midwest (disambiguation) article says that there are two other regions in the world which are labelled Midwest or Mid West. --Tocino 18:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
There's "Midwest", "Mid West", and "Central". They're all different. -- MeHolla! 18:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Agreed they are different. In case you are not fluent in English Tocino, even a difference in spelling is significant in the English language. .:DavuMaya:. 19:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Don't patronize me. English is my native language. If you read the disambiguation page the Brazilian region is translated as Midwest and the Australian region is basically the same, there's only a slight difference in spelling. --Tocino 22:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Regardless, you cannot move pages unless there is a consensus of voters. Just because you think so isn't a good enough reason to move the page. -- MeHolla! 23:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
I thought the title was unfulfilling beforehand, and then I read on this talkpage that other editors had similar concerns. Keep in mind you also had no consensus to revert, and I easily could've kept this going but I don't want to start another pointless edit war. --Tocino 03:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
You don't need consensus to revert, you need grounds, and the grounds for the revert was that you had no consensus. -- MeHolla! 02:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
In an honest effort Tocino, you have assumed good faith to move the page but it was a little too bold of you unfortunately. Though there may be some argument that the title is as you say U.S.-centric, you must also recognize this is the English Wikipedia and the rule of thumb is to use the common or local name. Otherwise all our article titles would be full sentences in order to "technically" describe events. Let us have a little bit more discussion before a revert war begins. .:DavuMaya:. 02:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Rendering problem on Firefox 3/mac

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I saw this problem over on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact page as well: the color key doesn't show up in Firefox. (Since fixed on that page, see the talk section).

http://slim.deasil.com/~swain/screencaps/indianaff.png

The same in Safari:

http://slim.deasil.com/~swain/screencaps/indianasafari.png

swain (talk) 20:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Update slap and satisfy notability

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Okay, an anon IP has slapped Update monikers on lots of sections. I almost reverted them until I realized that this page is failing in notability by not fully reporting the follow through. It's akin to, when a news item stops being reported, no one cares anymore. That's happening to this page right now and as a result could arguably be purged in an AfD attempt. If you started a section, you must fulfill it by finding out the consequence, otherwise that section will fail notability (ie: if the flood didn't do anything significant, why should it be encyclopedic?). Simply being part of a 2008 Midwest flood is not good enough for the casual relationship to satisfy notability. .:davumaya:. 23:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Damage estimates are still being calculated, flood just recently ended, as in last week and this week, in some localities. Death tolls are current, and end dates are accurate. Once damage estiamtes and impact are available they can be added. National Gaurd is still active in Indiana, so I am sure it still so in the other states that were worst affected. Not enough time has passed to complete the article or for the full impact to be established. Charles Edward 23:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.examiner.com/a-1432603~Flooding_breaks_records_set_in_1913_flood.html
    Triggered by (?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$) on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 01:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Inaccuracies in this Article with respect to the Iowa portion of the floods.

edit

INACCURACIES Only a brief review of the Iowa portion of this article revealed a some inaccuracies which I will outline below.

The article, with respect to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, talks of levees and levees breaking. As a Cedar Rapidian, I know of only ONE levee in town. That levee did not break. It WAS overtopped quite early into the 2008 crisis. The rest of the river system through Cedar Rapids at that time (and as of 2016, remains nearly unchanged) was either lined on each side of the river with river walls, or had banks high enough to contain the river through moderate flood levels (and in fact, the subsequent 2013 flood that crested at 18.23 feet, or almost 13 feet below the 2008 event, did not significantly wet any streets in Cedar Rapids).

Reviewing other information in the article with respect to the Cedar River, I see that there is reference to a railroad bridge in Waterloo washing out. I remember at the time wondering which bridge this was, as I didn't recall (and still have not discovered) any active railroad lines directly linking Cedar Rapids with the Waterloo John Deere plant (as the AP article talks about). I have never discovered any other mention of this bridge in Waterloo. However, in Cedar Rapids, there were TWO railroad bridges that washed out. I wonder if the AP reporter at the time was confused about where he/she was reporting from?

Perhaps the WHOLE section referring to the Iowa portion of this 2008 event really needs to be completely wiped and replaced with ONLY the link to the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_flood_of_2008 which seems to contain somewhat more current information (though even it needs to be revised).

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on June 2008 Midwest floods. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on June 2008 Midwest floods. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on June 2008 Midwest floods. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:04, 2 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:June_2008_Midwest_floods&oldid=1259606715"