Talk:Puʻu ʻŌʻō

Article scope and title

While this article is named Pu`u `O`o, the article itself is about the 1983 Kilauea eruption. The US Geological Survey's Hawaiian Volcano Observatory seems to prefer to call this eruption the, "Pu`u `O`o-Kupaianaha eruption." [1] I think this article should be renamed since it seems to focus more on the eruption than on the Pu`u `O`o cone. Aoi 10:22, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It seems to be Wikipedia custom to use the most common name in the title so that editors can most easily link to the article. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), especially the Use simple titles section. To me, the geographical landform (Pu`u `O`o) is inextricably linked to the 20+ year eruption --- there would be nothing to write about in Pu`u `O`o article if we moved this to "Pu`u `O`o-Kupaianaha eruption". Therefore, I would oppose such a move. -- hike395 14:44, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

P.S. If the consensus is to move the article, I would urge the mover to not use `okina or apostrophes or back quotes in the title, following the guidelines in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). -- hike395

In trying to reach a compromise, I changed the "History" section header (which precedes the bulk of the article) to read "Pu‘u ‘Ō‘ō-Kūpa‘ianahā eruption". So, most of the material is properly labeled, while still retaining the simple title. And, we get to use proper Hawaiian spelling, too. -- hike395 15:04, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I read the naming conventions simple titles section and looked over your changes in the article. I see your reasoning and I am quite happy with your compromise. I'm not sure what to suggest about the your concerns about this article's name, however. I would think that we should just use the "American English" name (Puu Oo) with redirects from other pages; also, this would be consistent with the other Hawaiian-place name articles on Wikipedia. Anyway, thanks for the compromise. Thanks! Aoi 01:21, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Aoi! I think we've found a good compromise.

About the article title: yes, you're right, following precedent, the title of this article should be "Puu Oo". But, since "Puu Oo" already exists and is a redirect to this article, it would take an admin to move it there and still keep all of the edit history. I didn't think it was worth pestering an admin. -- hike395 16:34, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good point. Ok, I agree with you about the name of this article. Thanks again for your compromise. I might add some more recent history about this eruption at a later date. I look forward to your input. Aoi 00:17, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The coordinates link on top is misformatted

Regarding to the name: according to the Geographic Names Information System the Hawaiian spelling (with ʻOkina instead of Apostrophe) is official since 1999 after a decision of the United States Board on Geographic Names. --ThT 09:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

German Pu'u 'O'o article very detailed

For fun, I took a look at the German version of this article. It's very long and detailed, with many photographs.

My German is extremely rudimentary --- can anyone translate the German article and add material to this one?

hike395 12:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

The article seems to follow "The Pu‘u ‘O‘o-Kupaianaha Eruption of Kilauea Volcano, Hawai‘i: The First 20 Years". Therefore it would be easier to use this source instead. --ThT 09:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Recent Information

I added recent information from the USGS. When I read this article its information ended a decade ago in 1997. BUT...

I am not able to get the "lava flow" map I added to format correctly. I think it should be positioned either at the beginning of the "Puʻu ʻŌʻō-Kūpaʻianahā eruption" or my "Recent Activity" section.

Can someone help position this map? Thanks, Nick Beeson (talk) 15:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

jhuhbty

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.106.58 (talk) 19:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Cinder cone?

The article says that Puʻu ʻŌʻō is a cinder/spatter cone. But where would it get cinders as it usually has effusive eruptions? Or has it had explosive eruptions in the past--The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 04:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Pu'u 'O'o is indeed a cinder/spatter cone. Its eruptions are generally effusive in nature now, but the majority of the cone that stands today was built during large lava fountaining episodes between 1983 and 1986 that produced cinder and spatter (though activity at Pu'u 'O'o has never really been "explosive"). For reference, see the USGS Hawaiian Volcano Observatory's description of how Pu'u 'O'o was formed and the associated photo gallery. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 09:24, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

But cinders only come from explosive eruptions. So if it has never had had any explosive eruptions, how can it be a cinder cone? --The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 23:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Where does it say that cinder-and-spatter cones only result from explosive eruptions? The eruptions themselves do not need to be explosive; all you really need is magma with a high gas content. The high gas content and pressure from the eruption effectively throws the magma into the air, producing the cinder as the interaction with the air rapidly cools the fragments. While one can argue that the lava is "exploded" into the air to produce cinder, the eruption itself is not explosive. The photos of Pu'u 'O'o I referred you to above show an example of this: gas-rich lava is being violently thrown into the air to produce cinder (and spatter). However, if you look at those photos, it is clear that the eruption itself is not "explosive." In any case, the link I referred you to--maintained by the US Geological Survey--calls Pu'u O'o a "cinder-and-spatter cone." 青い(Aoi) (talk) 02:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I am enlightened. --The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 04:30, 16 October 2009 (UTC)