Talk:April 2010 Rio de Janeiro floods and mudslides

Lexi lover (talk) 14:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC) People obviously have no information for this event! Not an updated article! Lexi lover (talk) 14:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

{{Help me-helped}}

Untitled

Hey, I was wondering if the April 2010 and the January 2010 mudslide articles be merged, and then continued to be edited from there. I plan to add at least 300 more words to get this article updated. How do I make a suggestion to merge this? Castil18 (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Merging  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

However, these two events were several months and about 100km apart; I don't think covering them in the same article would be a good idea. Where do you see the connection beyond the fact that both mudslides occured within the same state? Huon (talk) 20:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

You're right User:Huon, I didn't look at that before. However, since both earthquakes were within the same state of Rio de Janiero, I was thinking to combinethem that way and talk about how the citizens had a rough year. I'm still thinking about it, since I read an article describing the rough situation. Castil18 (talk) 23:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to bother, but I have another question about this article. Ive looked at various new articles about this phenomena, includding the ones listed in the references. The death count ranges from 94 to about 250. How am I able to provide an accurate number given this problem? Thanks. Castil18 (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The mudslides happened over the course of several days. For example, we cite news reports from the BBC, April 6 (~90 dead), BBC, April 8 (~150 dead) and AFP, April 13 (246 dead) - those are not contradictory but represent a rising death toll due to an ongoing disaster. That's how we should cover these numbers. Huon (talk) 23:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I wrote a proposal for this article in my writing class. Sorry it's rather long, but I want to show this proposal to solve any issues before I actually start editing.

""The first edit I am going to make deals with finding out an accurate estimate to how many deaths there were. The number of deaths currently in the article is 212, but in the info box it says at least 249. I looked at the three references used, but one of them said that the number of deaths was 184 while another said 246. I have to figure out how to include the deaths from 180 mudslides. The references I will be using for this part are the articles from Barrionuevo and BBC News (Fresh Brazil Landslide) found on my work cited page. I also want to type a few more sentences to add on to what happened days after the storm. The source I will use will be the article from The Gaurdian. One last thing I want to do before adding new sections is to brief update on Rio de Janeiro getting yet another major mudslide in January 2011 with Brasileiro’s article. After dealing with those edits, I want to create a new section, “Governmental Reaction”

Governmental Reaction “During this storm, “14,000 people were forced to leave their homes and seek refuge with relatives or at shelters.” Over 180 mudslides occurred that Tuesday. (Azul) On April 13, United Press International reported on shortages of drinking water. Also, city authorites initially were not able to say when power, gas, and water supplies were going to come back on, which made the residents start complaining of the slow relief. They also blame on decades of negligence for this disaster, since Rio de Janiero has the highest proportion of people living in poverty. However, although there were many complaints, the storm itself was not “extraordinary”. Rain and mudslides were common during the month of April. The President declared that “once the storm has completely receded, a new drainage system would be built.” He also said that it would not affect the 2016 Olympics, since the projects involving the Olympics would take six years to complete (Azul).”

Castil18 (talk) 04:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't quite see the relevancy of the proposed "Plate Tectonics" section. Firstly, it seems to deal with mudslides in general, not with the April 2010 Rio de Janeiro mudslides; thus it seems off-topic for this article. Secondly, I don't think mudslides are really related to plate tectonics; Rio de Janeiro is safely in the middle of a plate, not near the plate boundaries where plate tectonics could have a significant effect; thus it seems misnamed. Huon (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Naomi, 1. Not every sentence has a citation at the end. I believe that your information has come from reliable sources, but you have to make sure that on both the submitted assignment on canvas and on the talk page(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:April_2010_Rio_de_Janeiro_floods_and_mudslides) have the citations at the end of each sentence. I noticed that in some places you would cite by doing something like this, (author's last name). That type of citation is correct for papers, but on Wikipedia, you can insert the citation and it'll come up with a superscript number. You can practice doing this in your sandbox. 2. Your language is not subjective and maintains a neutral tone. However, I'd suggest taking out some of the direct quotes you used. Try putting them into your own words. 3. You have no unsourced opinions. As I mentioned before, just make sure you properly cite each sentence. Overall, good job! I'd just like to say that I don't think you need to put the quote about what mudslides are under the heading "Plate tectonics and Mudslides." If someone doesn't understand what they are, they can find that information out on the mudslides page. As for merging the two articles, you should probably shouldn't. They were two different events and days in history; they can stand for themselves. Gina at Stockton College (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

That's fine everyone. I made some edits accordingly. I'm just going to add the "Governmental Reaction" section, and take it from thereCastil18 (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2014 (UTC)