Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Earthquakes

An RM to lowercase named fracture zones

Talk:Mendocino Fracture Zone#Requested move 20 November 2024 may be of interest to editors here, a request to lowercase names of multiple named fracture zones. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

A Class promotion for 1995 Neftegorsk earthquake

According to WP:A?, when there is not a formal process to assess A class, it requires the support of at least two uninvolved editors without significant opposes. This is to let you know know that I have started a discussion for whether to upgrade the 1995 Neftegorsk earthquake to A. I hope to hear feedback. Thanks, SamBroGaming (talk) 01:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

2025 Karachi earthquakes

Hi all. I have started a draft about the subject here. Anyone is most welcome to contribute, thank you! M. Billoo 21:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I think that it is unlikely to meet the notability requirements, particularly the extent of coverage - see WP:EVENT. Mikenorton (talk) 22:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

@Mikenorton: Thank you for your response. I am aware of the policy, and here is how I assume it can qualify:

• Coverage in the international media: [1] (An Indian website, inaccessible in Pakistan and appears non-RS, however, bylined) [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]
• Not a single event, but series of events (57 quakes reported within a month)
• Event after event: jailbreak due to the earthquake swarm

Please see WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:DIVERSE, and it seems not a ROUTINE and DELAY violation. Thank you! M. Billoo 22:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Just studied WP:N(EQ) as well. Found these points useful:

• a small quake that causes a notable structure to collapse, [...] has a large impact [...] In such a case the impact is notable, but the event triggering it is not.
• The notability of an event is assessed by coverage that is significant in having both depth and duration.
• Independently of any societal impact, earthquakes can have scientific impact.
• [...] coverage in the news, and over an extended period.
• a recurring earthquake that returns much sooner (or later) than expected, may be scientifically notable

Hope I cleared my point. However, we can change now the title to 2025 Karachi earthquake swarm and jailbreak, right? Thank you! M. Billoo 23:16, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Also, I read the similar news today. Japan islanders sleepless after 900 earthquakes in two weeks. M. Billoo 23:39, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

You have shown that the jailbreak made the international news, not that the earthquake swarm did and the jailbreak would definitely not be notable. We do have a few articles on earthquake swarms, mainly on ones that had scientific papers written on them and/or caused deaths/injuries and significant damage. That may happen here, but hasn't happened yet. Mikenorton (talk) 08:11, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Describing magnitudes and intensities

A discussion over at Talk:2025 Afghanistan earthquake#A to An has made me look again at how we describe magnitudes, particularly when using the M_w  symbol for moment magnitude. We should I think always use "moment magnitude scale (M_w )" on first use in any article. Also if we have to refer to an event of say M_w  6.5 we should use the form "an M_w  6.5 earthquake" rather than "a M_w  6.5 earthquake".

I have also wondered for a while about how we describe intensities. The various descriptors such as "severe" or "extreme" describe the intensity of shaking and I think that we should explicitly state that. I have done that for one or two articles, see the second sentence in the 2025 Myanmar earthquake article. This would only affect article in which a descriptor is used in text. Others may feel that this overly pedantic.

These are two proposals that affect a large number of earthquake articles, so comments welcome. Mikenorton (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Earthquake light § Skepticism section

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Earthquake light § Skepticism section. —Rutebega (talk) 21:26, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Discussion about WikiProject banner templates

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

• "This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale."

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:42, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)