Talk:2023 Turkey–Syria earthquakes

Strongest earthquake in recorded history in Turkey?

According to List of earthquakes in Turkey, the 1668 North Anatolia earthquake was 8 on an (unspecified) scale, and according to 1668 North Anatolia earthquake it was 7.8 - 8.0 M_s. Also, according to the list, the 557 Constantinople earthquake was X (intense). Does this invalidate the statement in the lead,

With a maximum Mercalli intensity of IX (Violent) and a magnitude of 7.8 Mww, it is tied with the 1939 Erzincan earthquake as the strongest earthquake to hit Turkey in recorded history.

? Nø (talk) 10:49, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Unless we have a Richter scale for these earlier earthquakes, it and the 1939 earthquake are the strongest recorded. We can add a statement about other earthquakes which are believed to be at least as strong, but they are not "recorded" in the same way Animal lover |666| 11:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I think it actually means instrumentally recorded, as there were no seismometers in 1668. C messier (talk) 12:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

You are probably right; the intention is to say it is the strongest scientifically recorded. However, saying it is the strongest "in recorded history" is false. I'll amend (unless it's already been done.) Nø (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Mercalli intensity is a subjective scale. For instance, 1939 Erzincan earthquake has abolished every building but one in the city during night with very cold weather resulting in 40k+ deaths. These realities are what makes it XII (Extreme). This earthquake, on the other hand, was under-reported as 7.4 yesterday morning and there was not enough media coverage of some parts (which we get bad news about constantly now). I think it is possible the Mercalli intensity will be higher if it was re-evaluated now or couple of days later. Can we say it is the strongest earthquake in recorded history in Turkey? I believe so, but we should wait for the definitive number of casualties, injuries, and property damage. Yanekyuk (talk) 11:40, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

A strong example to the lack of translation from Mercalli intensity to Richter doesn't work: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake was intensity VIII in closer places such as Los Gatos, Santa Cruz, and Watsonville but intensity IX in parts of the more distant San Francisco. Animal lover |666| 12:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

At the very least these are the strongest in the history of the Turkish Republic. Borgenland (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Aftershock epicenters ?

Can the table of aftershocks have their epicenters added to the chart? Especially the 7.5 -- 64.229.90.199 (talk) 11:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't think anyone would mind if you did that. Yanekyuk (talk) 21:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The article is locked. Someone else will need to do it -- 64.229.90.199 (talk) 14:27, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

7.8 Mainshock

The Tohoku University seismologist that was interviewed has a wiki article, but it is in Japanese, can anyone link the Japanese language wiki page to get to the page about Shinji Toda? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.116.117.146 (talk) 01:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

7.5

According to the BBC the 7.5 isn't an aftershock, it's a separate new earthquake near Ekinozu, outside of the Gaziantep region -- 64.229.90.199 (talk) 11:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Wait a few days until the seties of earthquakes is over, then it will be easier to figure out what's what. Experts are undoubtedly doing their best, but it's too early to be sure Animal lover |666| 12:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

It's on a different but connected fault as far as I can tell. Probable a case of triggering as a result of coulomb stress transfer, but that speculation will have to wait for sources to support it. Mikenorton (talk) 19:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can see the BBC is not claiming that it isn't an aftershock, just quoting unnamed officials who say so.

This NBC article quotes a seismologist saying that it is an aftershock, and gives reasoning. That seems more authoritative to me. Armouredduck (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that counts as "reasoning". I am not sure it can be count as the same fault "line", while it is only okay to say it is part or the same fault "system". People should take a look at the definitive map of fault lines on Turkey using this link. To me, it seems more reasonable that the first earthquake caused an aftershock of 6.7 magnitude and also another earthquake on a very close but different line of 7.5 magnitude which itself caused another two aftershocks of 6.0 magnitude. In other source that claims the 7.5 earthquake is an aftershock, it is said that it is usual for aftershocks to be at least 1.0 lower than the mainshock. It may be required in a future time to actually give credit to a Turkish institution's publication rather than very hastily prepared pieces of reports that only seems authoritative. Yanekyuk (talk) 21:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

False precision

Please avoid false precision such as "1,797 dead, 6,893 injured", which I have just replaced in the infobox with "over 1,700 dead, over 6,800 injured". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Sadly User:Quake1234 keeps restoring a falsely-precise figure, without taking up my invitation to discuss here, apparently in the mistaken belief that being a able to cite a single, dated source is somehow adequate in a tragic case of this scale. They claim that "an exact number is used in the sources", when, in fact, sources differ; and are changing rapidly. Furthermore, their own citation has the title ""Death toll exceeds 1,700 as second quake strikes Turkey", and in its body says (emphasis mine) "At least 1,700 people are believed to have died after two earthquakes struck Turkey and Syria. The confirmed death toll from this morning's earthquake in Turkey has now risen to 1,014, the head of the country's Disaster and Emergency Management Authority has said. The death toll in Syria now stands at 783,". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:36, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

@Quake1234: Using such a value is a violation of MOS:UNCERTAINTY. Specifically, the MOS states that "Precise values (often given in sources for formal or matter-of-record reasons) should be used only where stable and appropriate to the context". That means that while the precise value is appropriate to the context, it is not stable and thus shouldn't be used here. Noah^Talk 13:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

An exact number, when reported to represent something real, may be used. However, while there are almost certainly people who died and their deaths are still unknown, even exact numbers reported don't represent anything real; it's merely a snapshot of what's known. Even if we had some magical ability to get the current number of known dead at any given time, by the time we publish it the numbers will have gone up. We should only use rounded numbers for that reason until the rescue attempts are over. And this should apply to all earthquakes, everywhere in the world. Animal lover |666| 13:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I could say i am sorry hundreds of times to you. I would normally not be up with using rounded numbers, but since you said you're using them temporarily, I guess I could forgive you Quake1234 (talk) 14:18, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

You've done a great job on this article. It was just this one thing that we have complete uncertainty on and anything we write should reflect that until any reasonable uncertainty can be eliminated DarmaniLink (talk) 14:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

+1 per @Animal lover 666

We should be using rounded numbers until the dust settles otherwise we'll just end up in an edit scramble every time a higher number comes out and only update every 100 "milestone" from there. DarmaniLink (talk) 13:59, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I went ahead and made the change. DarmaniLink (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

We're back to:

• Over 1,498 dead with over 8,533 injured in Turkey
• Over 810 dead with over 2,000 injured in Syria
• Total: Over 2,308 dead with over 10,533 injured

This looks stupid. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Round to the nearest 100 until the dust settles. Anyone disagree? I'm gonna make that change and if you disagree and think it should be done any other way, lets discuss it DarmaniLink (talk) 14:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Correction, round down to the previous 100. DarmaniLink (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion: someone should edit {{rounddown}} to enable decimal separator which currently used here in the infobox. Hddty (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I thought about it but once all the final counts are known and settled I would like to have precise numbers and would rather not risk this becoming a permanent solution any more than it already is.

I didn't know this existed or i would have used it at the start which would have been better than mentally rounding everything down so we could remove the final tallies.

@Quake1234 If you want to add precise numbers every time new ones come out and {rounddown|number|-2} on all of them, then remove the templates after a few days, you got the green light. DarmaniLink (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

We're back to false precision, again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:53, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I added a rounddown with auto formatting so all you have to do is drop the number in and wikipedia does the rest of the magic. If anyone tries to change it again, please change it back and tell them to go to the talk page to make their case for keeping the precision while tolls are rising. DarmaniLink (talk) 00:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

@DarmaniLink: To attempt to address one of your earlier concerns about this becoming a permanent solution, I have added Template:Update after at the end in this edit. Update after is a template for when it is likely that an update will be required in the future, but that such an update is not needed at this time. It is set to trigger in two weeks so that it can be determined if we should switch back to precise counts. Additionally, I have added in the reason to instead add two weeks to the Update after template if it is not yet a good idea to switch back. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:11, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks man, all these cool toys wikipedia has i never knew existed. DarmaniLink (talk) 04:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

These "cool toys" have not resolved the issue that the lede currently ends with the implausible claim that "7,108 were killed in Turkey and 2,547 in Syria". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Per USA Today, "Turkey's disaster management agency said the country's death toll passed 12,000 early Thursday. The Turkish news agency Andalou reported that 12,391 people were killed and 62,914 others were injured. The Syrian Health Ministry placed the toll in government-held areas at more than 1,200, and at least 1,400 people have died in the rebel-held northwest, according to the White Helmets volunteer agency." CNN uses similar quotes. This leads me to believe that we should attribute the deaths more to the agency and ministry reports if there are concerns about the figures. Would that work for you? --Super Goku V (talk) 06:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

It's less awful than the bare figures I quoted, but I don't see the need to quote precise figures, when we know that they are inevitably, and sadly, going to change. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Aftershock list is getting both too long and too short

As it is, currently the list of aftershocks only list the aftershocks that were 5+. Beforehand it was 4+, but then the 4-5's started flooding the list. I take issue with the list just kinda being cut down like this, it kinda underplays the notability of the 4-5's. Now we may be getting to the point where me may have to cut 5-5.3 and only keep 5.4+ on the list. At that point we would be excluding over 100 notable aftershocks from the list.

I can see how the list shouldn't 120-ish aftershocks worth of scrolling. Well, nice argument, but why are we not writing them down anywhere? I say we put the 4.0+ quakes into a collapsed list instead of just deleting them. Nice argument (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

i think the best option would be to rm the list from this page and hyperlink to a new List of Notable Aftershocks in the 2023 Turkey-Syria Earthquake with all the 4.0 +DarmaniLink (talk) 19:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

What makes the M4–4.9 aftershocks notable? Readers who are interested can look up the aftershocks using this link. Mikenorton (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

notable might the wrong word to chose, remarkable? significant?

Typically that 4.0 is the point where it startles most people DarmaniLink (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

We should split off the article to make List of aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey-Syria Earthquake, or alternatively: List of aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey-Syria Earthquake Swarm. ElusiveTaker (talk) 20:53, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

That would be good. With those kinds of lists, we can get overly long. DarmaniLink (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

There is only one such list in the project - List of aftershocks of the April 2015 Nepal earthquake, I'm not sure what makes these aftershocks particularly special. Note that this is definitely not a swarm. Mikenorton (talk) 21:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

If there's a list, then we have precedent to add one. More information is better than less so long as it isn't WP:UNDUE which this isn't. DarmaniLink (talk) 21:05, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

The naming format is a bit different, but there is the List of foreshocks and aftershocks of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

needs to be renamed but I didn't move since there's an under construction tag. don't want to disrupt the editor Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 08:31, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

you're free to move it now if you want DarmaniLink (talk) 08:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I fail to see why. Can you clarify? (I also don't see any construction tags.) --Super Goku V (talk) 08:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

i think dora was talking about List of Aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey–Syria Earthquake DarmaniLink (talk) 08:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. That would explain things. --Super Goku V (talk) 20:20, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

List of Aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey–Syria Earthquake

It seemed like it needed to be made but nobody was doing it so i went ahead and made it, this should solve this problem we were having DarmaniLink (talk) 08:39, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

IMHO, the solution is the map (which we already have) plus perhaps a chart/graph. The table is just going to take over otherwise. I.grok (talk) 23:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Name of Turkey

According to Wikipedia's own page Name of Turkey the country is now preferring to be called Türkiye, and the UN is now using this name. I'm puzzled why on an article referenced on Wikipedia's home page it isn't referred to as such. 2604:2D80:9F0D:2B00:8088:572F:CDB9:A470 (talk) 00:44, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

The reason is that the current consensus at talk:Turkey is to use Turkey due to the fetch thst the current spelling is the WP:COMMONNAME used by most reliable English language sources. Also, while they may change in the future the last discussion regarding changing the article title was closed in late November 2022 so it’s highly unlikely that there is, at this point, a significant enough change to support using the new name.--70.24.249.205 (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Unless/Until the Turkey article is moved per an RM, the rest of Wikipedia (other than the Turkey and Name of Turkey articles) should assume the country's name is Turkey. If/When it's renamed, we can discuss the point in time where the change starts to apply, and update this article if the point in time is before now. Note that these decisions should be made for Wikipedia in general, not with any specific reference to this article. Animal lover |666| 07:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I understand this, and I don't at the same time. It's just basic manners to refer to a person, an organization, a country, as they wish. If the argument is 'we use the name Turkey because everyone else does' then I have a hard time understanding when it could change, because for change to happen some people have to adopt and use the new name. I also don't see this consistently done throughout Wikipedia - for example, the page for Maize is named such even though it is not a commonly used name in English. But I suppose you have answered my question, and I don't want to argue, just want to offer a rebuttal to this. Thank you. 2604:2D80:9F0D:2B00:8088:572F:CDB9:A470 (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This talk page is the wrong place to discuss it. Please discuss it either at Talk:Turkey or at an appropriate venue based on the policies involved. This article won't be singled out for use of any other name for this country. Animal lover |666| 12:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Why is there an en-uk tag? This was previously en-us

Save for the "footballer" part, most of the spelling conventions are american english Should this be changed back? DarmaniLink (talk) 08:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I presume you are referring to the engvar parameter being set to en-uk in the infobox. If so, that was changed on the 6th in this edit by an IP user. They changed it this edit a day later to en-us. That edit was reverted a minute later with User:Ayıntaplı saying rv doesn't help, article is already in british english. As far as I know, this hasn't been touched again. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:27, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I'll change it back then since this is still largely american english DarmaniLink (talk) 08:34, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Last time I checked the article had British spellings like “centre” and so on. Maybe it was changed later. Ayıntaplı (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

"center" gets 41 hits and "cetre" gets 3, 2 of which are a proper noun DarmaniLink (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Why make it American English? Saint concrete (talk) 11:27, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Because the article is already in american english. Having an en-uk tag in the info box when its american english makes no sense DarmaniLink (talk) 11:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I recommend changing it to en-gb, due to the fact that places uses the British spelling of the word centre, instead of the American spelling of center. Europe is primarily dominated by en-gb, so it makes sense to change it to the localized English dialect. ElusiveTaker (talk) 17:06, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

"center" is used far more in the artcle and 2 out of 3 of the uses of "centre of them are the name of the thing itself with the third being a translation. we use "stories" instead of storeys. Of the uses of "center", most uses are "epicenter" while also being ".. business center" and "national center...". DarmaniLink (talk) 19:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This article seems to be mostly in en-US. Unless there is a strong reason, we should just keep eng-var field empty. nafSadh ^{did say} 22:46, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Palestinians

It should be noted that the Palestinians killed in Syria were refugees and stateless, so it is misleading to put the flag of Palestine that links to the page of the State of Palestine. Sakiv (talk) 19:04, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

If you include a source for it (nature of wikipedia), then it can be included.

Or you can go ahead and change it to "ethnic Palestinians" DarmaniLink (talk) 05:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

No, it should not be changed to "ethnic Palestinians, any more that the link to Australia should be changed to "ethnic Australians". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

What I meant was to add a note next to the flag. Massive earthquake kills 4300 people in Turkey and Syria Sakiv (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Building codes

This article is newsworthy because the earthquake happened in highly populated area where building codes were not enforced. In many videos we see relatively new buildings turned into pancakes. A section about Turkey building regulations and adherence to them is absolutely essential then. A good place to start: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/07/1154816277/turkey-syria-earthquake-why-buildings-collapsed R Alexandrov (talk) 19:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I have started this at Architecture of Turkey#Earthquakes and excerpted to Turkish_construction_and_contracting_industry#Earthquakes and List_of_earthquakes_in_Turkey#Buildings. Of course you and other editors are welcome to improve it.

Is anybody doing this on Turkish Wikipedia? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

If suitable you could excerpt it here (perhaps as a background section) or link to it from here Chidgk1 (talk) 08:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The humanitarian aid section is back to listing off countries

This seems like it might potentially get too long and might need to have a ton of stuff moved to the main article. What do you guys think? DarmaniLink (talk) 05:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I made a few edits to trim it down. Might need a few others to see what else needs to be trimmed and reworked. --Super Goku V (talk) 07:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Casualties by Turkish province

The table displaying deaths by provinces needs to be updated with the death toll rising. Can editors literate in Turkish find sources to update them? Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 06:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Pictures of collection of donations

I feel like there could be some pictures regarding the collection of donations by Turkish Embassies around the world, either in this article or the one about the humanitarian response. Maybe an example can be this one which I just uploaded. Any thoughts? SBS6577P (talk) 08:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

if you have a source to show that it was part of the donations/humanitarian effort it can be included DarmaniLink (talk) 09:28, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah here is the official announcement from the Turkish Embassy in Singapore [1] and also from local Singaporean news sites [2][3][4]. All of these mention 10 Genting Lane as the collection point. SBS6577P (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Is this structural engineering wikilink right?

In Architecture of Turkey#Earthquakes I have linked pancaking to Progressive collapse. Is that right do you know? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:34, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Error

Due to Edit conflict some error happened and many information got deleted without intension WikiEdits2003 (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Palm Tree in Main Image and Hypothermia Paradox - Could lead to Underestimation of the Cold

Please consider changing the first image with a palm tree as this might lead some readers to think that hypothermia risk isn't as great. We are talking about lows of at least -10 to -15 degrees Celsius in some parts of the affected region and this serious hypothermia risk should be made apparent so the general public isn't mislead by creating a false perception. Not everyone is aware of the climate of the quake region and a picture taken somewhere else poses a big risk for damaging awareness and creating false impressions. It could help save lives, even though it might appear irrelevant at first glance. 85.153.205.9 (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Good point. I believe the montage has been created by JoleBruh. Nataev ^talk 18:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Half-mast flag of one country isn't a good candidate for the top level montage. But, I'd not stress too much about the image for now. nafSadh ^{did say} 22:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Number of missing

I haven’t been able to get any meaningful number on those victims who remain missing. It seems Ankara and Damascus have yet to compile any such data. It would be useful to the article if we can find any reliable sources with confirmed data on the missing Juneau Mike (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Wrong use of caps along with semicolons

"Clockwise from top left: A Turkish flag flown at half-mast as a sign of mourning for the victims of the earthquake; A man sitting on a sidewalk in front of collapsed buildings; People surveying the damage after the earthquake; A collapsed police station; Displaced earthquake victims take shelter at an exhibition center" (notice the full stop missing at the end of the only complete sentence and after the numeration) is a wrong use of caps. SLBedit (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Moondragon21: Care to explain your revert? SLBedit (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

• @SLBedit: I'm not sure what you're referring to. My last edit on the article I added Template:2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake at the bottom of the page. Moondragon21 (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Moondragon21: Maybe you didn't want to revert, but you did. SLBedit (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@SLBedit: I'm sorry please accept my apologies Moondragon21 (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

"Northern Cyprus" in the foreign casualties table

Unlike eg. Kosovo or Palestine, Northern Cyprus is an entity with extremely limited international recognition - officially only Turkey considers it an independent country - and should be replaced with Cyprus on the table of foreign casualties. I'm neutral on this topic politically, but per WP:COMMONNAME, Cyprus is overwhelmingly the name used for this area in reliable English-language sources. (See the Turkey/Türkiye discussion further up on this talk page.) 73.168.37.85 (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

As far as I know, not all Northern Cypriot citizens are Cypriot citizens, so that wouldn't be correct. Ayıntaplı (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Recognition of a country isn't what Wikipedia is based on, it usually takes 'de facto' country status, e.g., Taiwan isn't recognized as a country by anyone. nafSadh ^{did say} 22:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but it also doesn't legitimize the use of North Cyprus national terms and imagery. If reliable English-language sources don't typically recognize this subunit of Cyprus as a separate country - and outside the Turkosphere they don't appear to - then neither does Wikipedia. Micronations and sovereign citizen groups grant citizenship to people all the time; if any of them happen to be victims, their countries won't be acknowledged as such on that page either unless it's already common in English to do so.

North Cyprus victims who have citizenship elsewhere (eg. Turkey) should be grouped with the country that granted it.

The revert to North Cyprus/TRNC should be changed back Cyprus.

73.168.37.85 (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Criticism of [Turkish] govt section

In Turkey the government has provided periodic "construction amnesties" - effectively legal exemptions for the payment of a fee, for structures built without the required safety certificates. These have been passed since the 1960s (with the latest in 2018). Up to 75,000 buildings across the affected earthquake zone in southern Turkey have been given construction amnesties. Turkey's decision to block access to Twitter for about 12 hours from Wednesday afternoon to early Thursday as people scrambled to find loved ones after devastating earthquakes compounded public frustration at the pace of relief efforts. Opposition leaders and social media users criticized the throttling of the platform, which has helped people share information on arriving aid and the location of those still trapped in rubble after the initial tremor on Monday. President Tayyip Erdogan's government has blocked social media in the past and focused in recent months on fighting what it calls "disinformation", which it said prompted the block on Wednesday.

But critics like Ozel point out that national funds meant for natural disasters like this one were instead spent on highway construction projects managed by associates of Erdogan and his coalition government. Turkish engineers had previously warned that cities could become 'graveyards' with building amnesty.

...Just in case someone doesn't want the above to be well known.Oathed (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC) Oathed (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I have made more additions to this. There are serious allegations (more than allegations, there are photos and videos) concerning forcing of aid to go through governors' offices (political appointees), delays in deploying military, tagging all aid with RTE name or party logos or ruling party slogans, diversion of machinery, limitations on social media, arrests of journalists, etc.. This section needs to be expanded a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:9AE7:B400:382B:7B3B:1A0B:E6D1 (talk) 23:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

References

was it a foreshock?

M 4.2 - 5 km W of Bahçe, Turkey יאצקין52 (talk) 00:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@User:Dora the Axe-plorer it was 2 days before the disaster. any idea..? יאצקין52 (talk) 06:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

It's within the aftershock zone hence part of the larger seismic sequence, yes it is a foreshock. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 06:50, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Dora the Axe-plorer take a look here File:Turkey_quakes.png. יאצקין52 (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

also another link יאצקין52 (talk) 07:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

prediction of earthquake

i think it is important to talk about the "prediction", whether you believe its possible or not of this earthquake. The tweet by Frank Hoogerbeets showed his prediction ended up being pretty close. my addition is being revoked because of "its psuedoscience". Even still, it matters to include it with a disclaimer about how earthquakes "cant be predicted". here was my additon

Prediction See also: Earthquake prediction The seismologist, Frank Hoogerbeets, predicted an earthquake would occur in the exact location the earthquake occurred. He said in a tweet on Feb 3, 2023, that has since gone viral, "Sooner or later there will be a ~M 7.5 earthquake in this region". His prediction ended up being 35-40 miles SW of where the original 7.8 magnitude earthquakes epicenter was and 95 miles SSW of the 7.5 magnitude aftershock. He later said after the earthquake that earthquakes like these are always preceded by "critical planetary geometry," similar to what happened before earthquakes in 115 and 526, and what happened on February 4-5. According to Hoogerbeets, "Earthquakes are affected by planetary alignments." His organization, SSGEOS, also claims to work on monitoring geometry between celestial bodies related to seismic activity. PalauanReich (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Like I said in the summary, "Sooner or later" is not a prediction. If you call "sooner or later" a prediction, anyone can predict earthquakes at this point. I could say "sooner or later" the San Andreas Fault in California will produce an earthquake. It's useless if the "prediction" isn't specific.

The reference you added (his tweets) are primary sources which doesn't support a lot of the claims in the description; that's WP:OR. FYI Hoogerbeets isn't a seismologist, he's a researcher. I agree this can be covered in the article since many rs mention his alleged "prediction" but the way it's written is not adequate and I've removed it. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 02:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I believe it can be included, but some, including me, touched on his tweet before, and many disagreed saying that it shouldn't be mentioned as trivia at all. Ayıntaplı (talk) 02:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hoogerbeets himself, in his own video, states that this was "a coincidence" and he "didn't know" (youtube video pqIrvFNltc0 link blacklisted; timecodes roughly 3:10–3:50). Folly Mox (talk) 02:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

A lot of his "predictions" never come true. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 03:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@PalauanReich I see you've added sources back. Can you please support what you've said with secondary sources? Using his tweets is original research. A lot of information there is uncited/unsupported by existing (and inappropriate) refs. Any editor can remove it if the section isn't improved Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 02:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

A humor columnist has done better than this. In 1989, Kevin Cowherd wrote these are two teams are from California and God only knows if they'll even get all the games in. An earthquake could rip through the Bay Area before they sing the national anthem for Game 3. Which is just when the Loma Prieta earthquake occurred. Except, we don't mention that at Loma Prieta earthquake, because, you know, million-to-one events are actually kind of common. This is nothing more than crank getting lucky. We forget all the unlucky cranks. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 03:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I would be fine with including the prediction stuff as long as we also include the statements from the U.S. Geological Survey and what reliable sources say about the misinformation. --Super Goku V (talk) 05:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I did include that info but it was still deleted. I could change it to alleged prediction or something like that, but it is still important info IMO PalauanReich (talk) 14:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@PalauanReich: I'm wondering how you're interpreting this as important information to include, when the Solar System Geometry Survey site specifically disclaims any ability using their method to forecast earthquakes with this kind of precision, and in a video posted days following the event, Hoogerbeets stated: "I tweeted about that region three days before it happened. That's more or less of a coincidence. ... There was some increase in seismic activity... and that made me think about the region, because historically there have been very large earthquakes — very deadly earthquakes in the past and it had been a long time. And that was the reason for me to tweet about that particular region, that sooner or later there will be around magnitude 7.5 again, and it just happened three days later, which I didn't know." If even the person who made the statement characterizes it as a coincindence rather than a prediction, what reason would we have for including it in an encyclopaedia article? Folly Mox (talk) 16:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

SSGEOS video

False information about maximum Mercalli intensity of earthquake

One of the strongest ground motion observed in Turkey earthquake history which is 2.14 g over Pazarcık (Kahramanmaraş). Hatay and Kahramanmaraş provinces damages are huge, almost there is no non-damage building over there. Most of them were completely collapsed. Death toll will be increased dramaticly following days. Many Turkish geophysicist professor says that maximum Mercalli intensity of earthquake XII (extreme) according to damage. In spite all of that wikipedia shows maximum Mercalli intensity IX, which is ridiculous according to damage.213.74.67.62 (talk) 09:55, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

The earthquake has been rated on intensity by reliable sources as IX, as you can see at the end of this archived discussion. If you have a reliable source that says the earthquake, and not the damage, had an intensity higher than IX, then please post the source for us to consider. Super Goku V (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

7.7 can not be the aftershock of 7.8

The degree of the earthquake, which is described as an aftershock, has been renewed. AFAD announced the first of the two earthquakes as 7.7 and announced the second as 7.6. According to the current situation on Wikipedia, the first one is 7.8 and the second 7.7. This does not fit the description on the aftershock page. It is neither an earthquake that occurred on the same fault nor its intensity is lower than the first earthquake. If it was high, this time we would call the first earthquake the foreshock of the second. However, it is neither higher nor lower, which makes using either name debatable. In addition, geologists around the world, including Turkey, often describe it as a second earthquake. In this case, the phrase aftershock should be reconsidered. BurakD53 (talk) 14:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

This is the sort of thing that will become clearer with hindsight. Better to wait for a scientific consensus to emerge than argue over it now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:59, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Agree with @HJ Mitchell. I still that USGS categorize it at 7.5. nafSadh ^{did say} 20:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Maps in info-box

In my opinion, the maps in the info-box should both be displayed simultaneously by default. Currently, the Turkish map is shown by default, and the Syrian map is collapsed by default, and there is the option to switch to the Syrian map or to display both of them simultaneously. In my view, this issue significantly affects both countries simultaneously, so the two maps should be presented together by default. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

JPL Photojournal's PIA25564: Satellites Assess Earthquake Damage in Turkey

Here is JPL's PIA25564: Satellites Assess Earthquake Damage in Turkey. Rjluna2 (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Confusing wording in Israel section

It currently says "Israel has deployed 430 search and rescue, disaster relief, 15 cargo planes, and humanitarian aid workers mainly to the areas of Adana and Gaziantep." 430 search and rescue what? workers? units? Should it be worded "Israel has deployed 15 cargo planes and 430 search and rescue, disaster relief, and humanitarian aid workers mainly to the areas of Adana and Gaziantep."? 196.159.218.213 (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Kurdistan Project

The Kurdish population is clearly affected by the Earthquake both in Turkey and Syria. Who is against adding it and for what reason? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Strong oppose. My initial comment in Talk:2023_Turkey–Syria_earthquake/Archive_1#Inclusion_of_Portal:Kurdistan: This was not the practice in past articles of earthquakes that were clearly within the Kurdish-majority region, such as Talk:2011 Van earthquakes(...) We may discuss this later, though, but I am totally against this during these troublesome times. Kurdish victims aren't thinking about Kurdistan, let alone millions of non-Kurds. Ayıntaplı (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2023 (UTC) I am simply against the involvement of contentious ethnopolitics in this dire situation for the moment. Ayıntaplı (talk) 19:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

If Kurds are affected in Germany or the UK etc. Project Kurdistan is a relevant project, but if the article is about an event in the country they were born not? To any additional relevant project an article is added, the chances rise it once gets included in some sort of a Wikieditin campaign. I now added project Kurdistan and a phrase on Kurds (the majority population in Van) also to the Van earthquake article.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

No to both. Ethnicity doesn't make us quake-proof. Won't discuss further. This is nauseating. Ayıntaplı (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

To be bluntly honest and fair @Ayıntaplı, inclusion of a project doesn't harm anyone, nor does it push any POV. It simply a statement by a project that the said project has interest in the article. I don't understand why there is any objection. If wikiproject Japan wants to add this, they should be able to do it -- it'd look stupid, but why bother opposing it? nafSadh ^{did say} 20:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

As per my comment 3 days ago, I'm not totally against it despite my current opposition, but I don't understand the apparent hype to add it the moment the earthquake happened. Ayıntaplı (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Support. I do support adding effects to the Kurds. Leaving out a heavy hit majority may raise some red flags, and even cause a major article dispute due to Wikipedia's policies. Including everyone affected is better than leaving them out. ElusiveTaker (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you add parts of your original comment here struck through, because what you meant here got confusing. Ayıntaplı (talk) 20:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)