Jump to content

Talk:2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ジャコウネズミ (talk | contribs) at 10:01, 19 June 2014 (→‎Largest in Japan.: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


magnitude 9.03 (Mw)

Is it an error?78.156.109.166 (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - the references all quote magnitude 9.0 from USGS, not 9.03. Where did this number come from? Carl-PG74 (talk) 05:52, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This man says 9.03. Maybe he's reading this Wikipedia article. Besides, earthquakes never have more than 1 number after the dot, to my knowledge. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drhWhd-i4oE 78.156.109.166 (talk) 09:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Largest in Japan.

Is it? The 869 Sanriku earthquake was believed to could have been around 9.0. 78.156.109.166 (talk) 10:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"around 9.0" has recently proposed by Tsunami deposit researches.

  1. M 8.3 Utsu, T., 2004, Catalog of Damaging Earthquakes in the World (Through 2002), the Dbase file distributed at the memorial party of Prof. Tokuji Utsu held in Tokyo.
  2. M 8.3 ± 1/4 宇佐美龍夫 (Tatsuo Usami) (2003). 日本被害地震総覧. 東京大学出版会. ISBN 9784130607599.
  3. M 8.3, Mw 8.4 国立天文台 [in Japanese] (2011). 理科年表 平成24年. 丸善. p. 721. ISBN 9784621084397.
  4. around 9.0 proposed by Koketsu, K., Kaminuma, K., individually, at The 190th meeting of The Coordinating Comittee for Earthquake Prediction, Japan (CCEP) (2011)

Please see also ja:貞観地震 or 869 Sanriku earthquake.--ジャコウネズミ (talk) 10:01, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Damage from the earthquake alone

How much damage/casualties from the earthquake alone (not the tsunami)? --78.156.109.166 (talk) 15:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 necessaryily 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 its 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.railway-technology.com/features/feature122751
    Triggered by \brailway-technology\.com\b 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 13:45, 3 April 2014 (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 22:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About aftershocks

I've been updated aftershocks, but is it better to update aftershocks referenced on M5.0以上の余震回数(that means "different number of magnitude of the aftershock table M5.0 or more) instead of 震度1以上の余震の最大震度別地震回数表(that means "different number of maximum seismic intensity of the aftershock earthquake table one or more" of Japan Meteorological Agency)? I think that it might have poor meanings on seismic intensity of JMA out of Japan, in the other hand, it may have some meanings that update with same measure in this article. In addition, the magnitudes announced by JMA (Mj) at the first have a little differences when comparing with moment magnitude (Mw) - are increasing in large number of magnitude such as the main shock -, causing necessity to warn tsunami(s) spread to every regions of Japan as fast as possible, then, JMA researches Mw later than announced Mj, and the table that I've just suggested has some corrections in later.--ジャコウネズミ (talk) 22:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)--Please see also Japan Meteorological Agency seismic intensity scale.--ジャコウネズミ (talk) 23:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]