Talk:Great Hanshin earthquake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Volunteer Day by Cabinet order?[edit]

"By cabinet order, January 17 is now Fire Protection and Volunteer Day across Japan." What's the relevance of this? It's not clearly explained. 01:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I tried to clarify this. See if it makes more sense now. Fg2 01:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Not ordered by the Cabinet. A source in Japanese says it was agreed at a Cabinet meeting on December, 15, 1995. I modified this part on March 28, 2008. Thank you so much. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 02:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources for "Plate tectonics"[edit]

Do any of you know a good source in English which includes a plain explanation of "how an active fault inside a land plate causes an earthquake"? Kobe earthquake was of this type, so it made a term "活断層" (katsu-dansō; active fault) more famous in Japan, or infamous, I should say. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Confusion about Kobe earthquake[edit]

When a cause of earthquakes is explained in English, the most popular one I guess is energy release around a plate boundary. Probably that's why no editor pointed out it's not the case with Kobe earthquake for this article for 2 years. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyright permission[edit]

As to Source Z:

Phew. I mispronounced "seismic" when I phoned MEXT to get a permission for utilizing Source Z. I asked in Japanese a division which controls it, specifying the section I wrote, and I got OK. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

As to Source X, Y, and an Oxford dictionary:

I think there's no need to ask for a permission. I used no copy from Source X, and cited only one sentence for a certain purpose from each of Source Y and the Oxford dictionary. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Magnitude and seismic intensity (shindo)[edit]

Plural magnitude scales[edit]

In news reports, a magnitude estimated by Japan Meteorological Agency is often described for accommodation as that on the Richter scale. However, JMA uses another scale than the Richter magnitude scale, which was the first-introduced magnitude scale in the world. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 02:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

This also is exacerbated by comparing the earthquake with the Northridge earthquake. In the article, the two are compared using different scales, causing confusion. Hawksocc8 (talk) 06:31, 13, Jul 2010 (UTC)

Two JMA magnitudes[edit]

JMA revised algorithm for the JMA magnitude scale, and introduced a new scale on Sep. 25, 2003. During the revision works, this earthquake's JMA magnitude was changed from MJ 7.2 to MJ 7.3 on April 23, 2001. As to this revision (in Japanese): a news release from JMA --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 02:46, 1 May 2008 (modified 08:28, 1 May 2008 and 05:36, 17 Jan 2010) (UTC)

I read again the winding news release from JMA to know that the JMA magnitude of this earthquake was adjusted to 7.3 and it stays as the same after this revision. So I modified the expressions in the article as so.--Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 05:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Misunderstanding about seismic intensity[edit]

I found this article's section "Seismic Intensity" was showing confusion between magnitude and seismic intensity, so I cleared it up. Magnitude shows a size of an earthquake itself, so it does not differ by observation points. Seismic intensity is a size of tremors observed at a particular place.--Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 05:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


I've found that the largest foreshock of the four was observed at 18:28 the previous day and it measured 3.7 on the revised JMA magnitude scale by searching JMA database of felt earthquakes. As to the magnitudes of the 4 foreshocks, this paper (in Japanese) supports the expression "between 1.5 and 3.6" which I modified. However, that may be a recalculation of the data from a research center of a Kyoto University's institute, which observed the foreshocks and says the largest one was estimated at M3.3 (in Japanese). --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 03:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Private efforts, 'Other Effects' sections[edit]

- I aggree that at this point, this article is a 'B.' there is a lot of literature on the earthquake, mostly in jp, to be fair, but surely there must be better sources in English. - provate efforts section: this section focusses on corporate efforts, but does not mention the contributions of ordinary citizens, which was by some acounts the most effective and numerous. Curiously enough, i gather organized crime also engaged in relief efforts, though don't have research on hand. - 'other effects' section: the word 'volunteer' entered the japanese vocab at that time and the japanese NPO law was created partly in response to the growth of citizens organizations established to provide relief. remember that japan does not have a charity culture like, say the UK and historic non-profit sector like, eg. Germany. an imporant local institution established at the time is fm waiwai, a multi-lingual broadcaster set up to emergency information to foreign residents (esp. Vietnamese and Korean). --Bine maya 16:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Personal experience[edit]

Hi! I experienced the Great Hanshin Earthquake when I was 1 year old. I almost died.

Woah. Where were you? What happened, and do you remember what it looked like?

Do you think you could tell me what happened? because it would be a great help for my geography project.

I just saw a documentary about the Kobe earthquake on Discovery. They showed pictures of the faultline visible to the naked eye. One plate higher than the other, as Kobe lies in a subduction zone. Could someone upload a photo of that? Jordskjelv 13:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Most costly disaster[edit]

" It was the worst earthquake in Japan since the Great Kanto earthquake in 1923, which claimed 140,000 lives, and it is listed in the Guinness Book of Records as the "costliest natural disaster to befall any one country," but it is expected that this earthquake will cede that title to Hurricane Katrina for the 2007 Guinness Book of Records. "

The Great Kanto earthquake article states that that quake did over $1 billion damage in contemporary dollars, which would probably put it over the estimated $75 billion of Katrina when adjusted for inflation. Additionally, this article states that the Great Hanshin quake did $100 billion dollars in damage, which is far larger than Katrina's damage. Accordingly, I am editing the article. -- 02:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Plate movement of 50km?[edit]

Seems a bit excessive...anybody care to check that fact out? CapeCodEph 04:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The Kobe Luminarie is not particularly near Shin Kobe station. It is closer to other stations such as JR Sannomiya. It would be more accurate to say it is held in central Kobe between Motomachi and Sannomiya near the Daimaru department store.

A very good source on the quake[edit]

I'm currently in correspondance with the author to get permission to release the images for use on Wikipedia. I'll put them up on Wikimedia Commons, if/when the author accepts. -- Exitmoose 00:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

That was quick. I recieved permission to use the images in the report, so I'll upload some of the better ones to the Commons. -- Exitmoose 01:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

That Paragraph Comparing this with Northridge 1994[edit]

Sorry, but that paragraph has got to go. Someone with some expertise, please help here. Weren't they about the same size? And wasn't the epicenter of the Northridge Quake directly under the city? Wasn't the epicenter of the Hanshin Quake in the bay somewhere? InFairness 22:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Northridge was a magnitude 6.7, and Kobe was 7.3. The paragraph states that they were "similar" strength earthquakes and questions why there was more damage in Kobe. This makes no sense because the two earthquakes were not similar strength at all, because the Richter scale is logarithmic. The energy released by the Kobe earthquake was 8 times greater than the Northridge earthquake. (Difference in magnitude is 0.6, so factor of extra energy released = (10^0.6)^1.5 See: For this reason, I have decided to remove the paragraph comparing to the Northridge earthquake, because the two earthquakes were not similar at all. (talk) 00:12, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Bad source[edit]

The source should be removed. It is a commercial site selling proprietary term papers. Fg2 10:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Nothing in this article about worldwide shortage of computer chips !?!![edit]

I remember that following this earthquake there occurred a worldwide shortage of computer chips. This was apparently because the factory making most of the world's production was located in Kobe, and had been put out of action for a very long period. A black market in computer chips developed, and burglars began stealing chips to order. I remember coming into the office (in London UK) once day, to see all the PCs lying on the floor, with CPU boxes opened and microchips stolen - everything else including hard disk memory was intact, as the thieves had a sense of decorum. The bosses were then forced to buy back chips on the black market in order to get the office back into operation again. 16 July 2007

[Nov 2009] I remember this too ... as I recall, the factory in question was making not chips, but rather most of the world's supply the black plastic outer material used for packaging and "bond out" in the business. I was living in the UK myself at the time, and retail prices of (legitimately sourced!) DRAM chips rose sharply and stayed at around GBP 30 per MByte for at least 18 months afterwards, rather than following the typical Moore's Law curve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Kobe earthquake and Sunflower in Japan[edit]

A young girl, one of the victims of the earthquake, one day placed a sunflower seed into soil in the garden, and she didn't have any chance to see its blooming because she was death in the middle of the incident. However, her sunflower was not. It was blooming shiningly in the center of the destruction. Later Japan was fill up with sunflower for her memories. I've got that information form Discovery , however I really don't know whether it was true and update to the article, or we have to open a new stuff with "From other side" title?Hanzo2050 (talk) 05:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, it is just a short clip (about 2min), however it gives a great symbol of difficulty solution ability of the Japanese.Hanzo2050 (talk) 18:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Here and here, read it yourself.Hanzo2050 (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Foreshocks and Aftershocks[edit]

Under this section, there is an explanation of how the Richter Scale works, etc. It is not really relevant to have it in the article ABOUT the Hanshin Earthquake. It's not really information specific to it; the article should just provide a link to the article Richter Magnitude Scale.Yumehoshijima (talk) 01:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Not only is it not relivant since the measurement given is on the Japanese scale, the explination is incorrect. An increase of 1 isn't a factor 10, its aprox 31ish, and an increase of 2 is 1000. Unfortunatly, just removing that line makes the already poor flow in that section even worse. (talk) 12:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Image Gallery[edit]

Not sure if i'm correct here, but it seems to me that most of the images in the "gallery" section are in the commons already. Perhaps removing this section and it's message might make this article seem a little better? (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Deaths in Kobe > Total Deaths ???[edit]

"Approximately 6,434 people lost their lives[...] about 4,600 of them were from Kobe"

This... doesn't make sense.


Fowl2 (talk) 04:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

What's the problem here? 4600 is less than 6434, but your section title says the reverse. Fg2 (talk) 09:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


Also in Japanese this earthquake and the disaster are sometimes crowned with "Kobe," the name of the megacity which underwent huge damages. 阪神・淡路大震災 (Hanshin-Awaji Daishinsai) is a name for the disaster, not for this earthquake, so I separated this name from "Great Hanshin Earthquake" in the article. Daishinsai means large (dai) disaster by earthquake (shinsai), i.e. earthquake calamity. NHK uses this official name approved by the then Cabinet. The placename Awaji is often omitted by other news media. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 05:03, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

RE: Damage in cities and the suburbs[edit]

I placed two tags, {{Unreferenced section}} and {{review}}, at the top of this subsection, whose content (as of 2010-01-18 21:28 UTC) is thoroughly sourceless and even does remind me of a Japanese phrase meaning 'a lie told as if one had observed the scene.' Every survivor who was actually at the scene must have been scarcely enough to help himself/herself (and his/her relatives or friends) for the first few days. It's very regrettable if the content stayed almost the same without any reliable source at least for about 18 months, as is suggested by an inter-revision difference. Here I list some points. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Gus lines: I removed the sentence beginning with "Ruptured gas lines ignited," which is dubious. (Does anyone know a good source in English?) Osaka Gas says in this page that the company shut off gas supply for many customers so as to prevent secondary disaster. By the time of this quake, microcomputer-controlled gas meters (designed to suspend gas supply when large tremors are detected) had prevailed to a certain extent, about 75 % according to a chart in Chapter 5 of this databook (Osaka Gas, 2009). This chart also says that quake-resistant gas pipes covered 68 % of the gas-pipe network. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Wooden houses: Unreinforced structure is probably one of major causes, but does not completely explain the huge damage. I've heard that one reason why many flat houses collapsed was that the seismic wave included strong short-cycle tremors causing sympathetic vibration of low buildings: if this quake had caused powerful longer-cycle tremors around the noon, it must have led to greater causalities in taller constructions. (Actually, the two Niigata large quakes in 2004 and 2007 made high buildings sway in Tokyo, far from the hypocenters, which fortunately killed no one.) --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Northridge earthquake: I think we should refrain from trying such a comparison unless we have a reliable source for the comparison itself which is supervised by an expert and easy for ordinary people to understand. --Dumpty-Humpty (talk) 23:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Kobe Earthquake Memorial Museum[edit]

There is a museum about this earthquake. It should be added in Memorials section.--Tranletuhan (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


Professor Motoji Ikeya of nearby Osaka concentrated his subsequent research on earthquake prediction in the wake of the Kobe quake and published extensively (in refereed journals [1] as well as two books in Japanese and one in English). He mainly concentrated on the strange behaviour of animals - particularly catfish small mammals - related to the piezoelectric effect of seismic activity, an earthquake precursor now being measured directly by the US company Quakefinder, to which I have no affiliation.--Timtak (talk) 02:42, 15 April 2015 (UTC)