Talk:2024 Lake Suviana explosion

Requested move 11 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

2024 Lake Suviana explosion → Bargi hydroelectric power station – The title is wrong. Not the lake exploded, but the power plant. The scope of the article is changed into a general scope of the power plant . 82.174.61.58 (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

You have made a total mess of this article, which is about the explosion. I am reverting all your changes to last stable version. Borgenland (talk) 16:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. This is an article that was ORIGINALLY MADE ABOUT THE EXPLOSION and NOT THE POWER PLANT ITSELF and is as nonsense as turning a piece of rock into a whale. You could have instead made a separate article on the power plant but no, you instead instead irresponsibly jumped the gun and proceeded to recklessly remake this entire article based on your POV without waiting for consensus. I have just warned you in your talk page about that and advise you not to make such edits again. Pinging User:Dubstar44, the original creator of this article, as a courtesy and to have them evaluate this proposal and subsequent damage. Borgenland (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Please be kind and don’t start shouting, that’s not needed. You point is clear, but because I didn’t remove content I thinks you are exagerating. But please talk at Talk:Lake Suviana were I already commented. 82.174.61.58 (talk) 17:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

You still drastically altered the article in a way that made its title and its content contradictory and even went as far as replacing an infobox with another that is entirely inappropriate for a disaster article, which is not an exaggeration. Borgenland (talk) 18:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello there, I would have to agree with the anonymous editor here, they have a point about being civil, we all disagree, and that's okay. I don't want this to turn into an edit war, let's reach a consensus. If you need a third opinion, I can provide one. Thanks, CpX41 (talk) 18:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

My apologies. At the time I was shocked when I first saw the extent that the article had been drastically altered and suspected vandalism. I have no objections about creating an article about the power plant itself, but I reiterate in a more civil manner my objection to rename this whole explosion into an article about the power plant, which is an entirely different thing, unless as part of a merger or a redirect proposal. Borgenland (talk) 18:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I withdrawal this move proposal 82.174.61.58 (talk) 18:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 11 April 2024 (2)

2024 Lake Suviana explosion → 2024 Bargi hydroelectric power station explosion – The explosion was not in Lake Suviana, but in a power plant 30m below the ground. This tree might help finding the best title for the article:

• There is a parc: Suviana and Brasimone lakes regional park
  • There are two lakes in the park: Lake Suviana (with a dam downstream) and Lake Brasimone
    • There are five villages around Lake Suviana including Suviana (namesake) and Bargi
      • Bargi is located upstream of the lake. In Bargi is located the Bargi hydroelectric power station (namesake of Bargi); that uses water of Lake Suviana but àlso of other water bassins in the region (what I understand also of Lake Brasimone, but I'm not 100% sure of that)
        • The explosion took place 30 metres below the ground, inside this power plant; not in the lake.

82.174.61.58 (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose, per WP:NCE- the location should be used, especially considering that most English sources seem to only refer to it as a hydroelectric power plant. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 18:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@Padgriffin: you say “the location should be used” but in fact the location was not the lake. The explosion was in the power plant (30 metres below the ground); yes the power plant is connected to the lake but the title now implies the explosion was in the lake. Or is that not confusing? 82.174.61.58 (talk) 21:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Support, the new name precisely references the man-made structure where the incident has occurred. On one hand there is the "where" and on the other there is "what" but in this context, I think the "what" should be in the name and "where" in the article. On a scale of importance, at some point, the "what" becomes more important than "where" and I think is the case. The article is still in development, and it is likely it be merged with the article for the power station, which has not been created yet. CpX41 (talk) 20:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Procedural oppose We have a draft article on the power station awaiting AfC review and an ongoing merge discussion into Lake Suviana. This requested move is well-intentioned, but as the previous !vote and !votes at the merge discussion outline, the prior question to ask is how Wikipedia should organise its encyclopedic coverage of the lake, dam, and explosion. There is clearly a discussion to be had about whether the dam merits a standalone article to the lake, and a discussion to be had about whether the explosion merits a standalone article to the dam. On these questions, between the merge discussion, AfC, and this RM, we are likely to be speaking across forums rather than helping to build consensus. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 20:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)