This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of earthquakes, seismology, plate tectonics, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes
2025 Myanmar earthquake is within the scope of WikiProject Myanmar, a project to improve all Myanmar related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Myanmar-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.MyanmarWikipedia:WikiProject MyanmarTemplate:WikiProject MyanmarMyanmar
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand
This article is part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam
This article in Nature provides additional support for this event being supershear in type, particularly in the part that propagated southwards from the epicentre. I'm not going to add it to this article as peer-reviewed papers are probably already being submitted and will no doubt appear over the next few months, at least if the Turkey-Syria earthquake is anything to go by. Mikenorton (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Change 'Vietnam sent 80 army personnel' to 'From March 31, a 106-member team, consisting of both the army's Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Public Security, was deployed to the earthquake-affected areas in Myanmar.
Why not call it the Richter scale? No one (except scientists) is familiar with Mw scale. Everyone knows the Richter scale.
The first thing people want to know about an earthquake is "how big was it?" Why not say it in a way that people understand? If it's important to reference both, we could write "a Mw 7.7 earthquake (7.7 on the Richter scale)" Otherwise most people just won't understand it. Omc (talk) Omc (talk) 13:31, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no measurements of this event on the Richter scale so to say it measured 7.7 on the Richter scale is factually incorrect. Mw and Richter scale are not the same. This article also provides a learning opportunity for readers; not all earthquakes are measured on the Richter scale. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 14:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me to enter this discussion. I have actually worked for C.F: Richter in his laboratory measuring magnitudes of earthquakes routinely. It is technically correct to say Mw, but OMC has a point in saying that everyone knows "the Richter scale". All magnitude scales ML, Ms, Mw (except mb) are supposed to be the same, only they do not quite mange to truly be the same. A correct, and perhaps helpful wording might be: "an Mw 7.7 earthquake, which is an extension of the Richter scale to large magnitude earthquakes". Please note that correct is "an M" not "a M". I will not make a change in the Wikipedia text, I leave it to you to do what, if you think it should be made. MaxWyss (talk) 15:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, forgot to mention Md, which is supposed to be the same as ML, but is not. I have written an article about the consequences of the differences between these two values in the Berkeley catalog for local earthquakes in Northern California. MaxWyss (talk) 16:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Pakistan's first consignment of 35 tons for earthquake affectees was handed over to Myanmar Authorities at Yangon International Airport, Myanmar. Ambassador of Pakistan at Myanmar H.E. Imran Haider along with Pakistan Embassy's diplomats/ officials officially handed over the relief handed over to Chief Minister of Yangon Region and Director General Training of MoFA.
== Pakistan ==
Pakistan's first consignment of 35 tons for earthquake affectees was officially handed over to Myanmar authorities at Yangon International Airport, Myanmar. The ceremony was attended by H.E. Imran Haider, the Ambassador of Pakistan to Myanmar, along with diplomats and officials from the Pakistani Embassy. The relief materials were handed over to the Chief Minister of Yangon Region and the Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) of Myanmar.
This aid was part of Pakistan's commitment to providing humanitarian support to those affected by the recent earthquake in Myanmar. The consignment included essential relief items to assist the affected communities in their recovery. NoorAli 20 (talk) 20:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My unique, professional contribution with correctly formatted references to the page on the Myanmar 2025 earthquake was removed. Who did this and why? MaxWyss (talk) 17:24, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The lines were removed on grounds of unencyclopedic writing, overlap with other sections of the page and WP:NOTNEWS, WP:UNDUE and WP:ROUTINE issues in a mass casualty attempt, not to mention the continuedly atrocious and improper bare url formatting of references. The title itself is a big giveaway when it comes to WP:UNDUE and WP:TRIVIA. Borgenland (talk) 17:35, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And as far as I'm concerned, it's not Wikipedia's job to report agencies racing to take credit for detecting the earthquake first and competing on how many obituaries will be made. Borgenland (talk) 17:41, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have published 250 plus scientific articles, have but together a couple of Wikipedia articles and have won comprehensions in short story contests. Unless you tell me exactly what is wrong, I will not change my text that is 1st class. MaxWyss (talk) 10:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Compare the paragraphs you've written with the rest of the article's writing and content format. First, the entire extract does not read like an encyclopedia rather an op-ed or opinion piece. Its tone, clarity and style is a complete contrast with the rest of the article.
Second, none of the sources given directly verifies anything said in the article. You are applying your inferences of very general sources into this specific event; that is WP:OR which is not allowed.
Third, there are unnecessary descriptions and without any accompanying figures, I have no idea what you are referring to:
"Recognizing the importance of estimating earthquake disasters rapidly, the European Commission has funded the research project GOBEYOND in order to reduce the response time after natural disasters, which can be as short as 2 minutes in case of earthquakes" > how is this related to the earthquake in question?
"as shown by the Figure of the free SMS alert distributed by QLARM 26 minutes after the earthquake" > what figure?
Forth, does this add any value to Wikipedia?
"In the case of the M7.7 Myanmar earthquake, the first report of its magnitude, M7.7, coordinates and depth, was communicated 8 minutes after the quake by the German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam by email." > I do not see any lasting or useful information for casual readers here. It may be helpful for academics like yourself but Wikipedia is not a scientific journal hence the kind of writing and content topic is not suitable
You are right when you say: "without any accompanying figures". The text has been removed before I could add the figures. Number of fatalities reported by news media and the Government of Myanmar (DVB) as a function of time after the M7.7 Myanmar earthquake of 28 March 2025... I find it hard to believe that this figure, which I now show in this answer, would be of no interest. MaxWyss (talk) 12:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are several errors in your reasoning why my contribution should be removed
There is no “overlap with other sections of the page” as you claim, except for the fact that QLARM and PAGER estimate approximately the same seriousness, similar number of fatalities, due to this earthquake. This is essential for taking these large fatality estimates seriously. A basic requirement in cases when reliable, direct observations are not available.
You are wrong in classifying my contribution as newspaper text. This is a scientific section, helping readers to understand more about the problem. I have noticed naïve and wrong questions being asked about earthquakes by readers of wikipedia. My contribution is in part an education of readers.
How can you claim wrongly that I do not give “Due (and undue) weight”? I give GFZ, the USGS, PAGER, and now in the new version, to reporting agencies due weight. Please explain your incorrect allegation, if you want to persist on this incorrect claim.
There is nothing “routine” about my contribution. My contribution is so specialized and unique that it could be made only by one person and that is me.
You seem to imply that my contribution is “Trivia”. Far from it. Contributing to enable rapid help for people bleeding to death beneath the rubble of their buildings is definitely not “Trivia”. That I am getting up out of bed in the middle of the night for earthquake alerts without a salary, you should appreciate as a volunteer worker yourself.
Your comment “competing on how many obituaries will be made” is firstly grammatically incorrect, and it is an insult to me that I do not accept. I have dedicated 20 years of my life helping to rescue earthquake victims. You ridiculing my dedication is out of place.
I have prepared a revised contribution, which I will now place on Wikipedia. If you have factual criticism, please make them, but refrain from insults and from vague, unhelpful comments like “unencyclopedic writing”.
I'm not sure if quake responders are or should be relying on wikipedia for information, especially given Wikipedia is blocked in Myanmar and requires a VPN.
I and other editors have flagged your edits to this article already. Unencyclopedic writing is not a personal insult. Creating a new section with the same weight as "Impact" or "Earthquake" for what is an essay (WP:NOTESSAY) is undue weight. Please see the policies that Borgenland actually linked- undue weight here refers to how, for the brevity of the article, we cannot simply include every single factoid. If you read this article, you have singular sentences dedicated to the destruction of towns or to the aid efforts by countries. Covering the race to report it is undue, especially if secondary sources are not discussing the "race to report it" as a major news story. If we saw, say, 50 different news outlets discussion the email from the German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam then it would warrant inclusion.
You are welcome to add your content within the context, if relevant and directly about the topic of what is already written, without adding duplicate content in your own section. The removals here are not about a content dispute. Other editors, like me, who are monitoring the page are implicitly reviewing actions like the revert and would contest if we found it improper. Haste is implied by the nature of a current event article to remove unsourced or improper content due to this article's prominence on the front page at the time. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 12:00, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Try and count the number of people to be mourned and insert 1st class linkrot again and you will surely be reverted for unencyclopedic editing. 12:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC) Borgenland (talk) 12:36, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that the death toll in Myanmar has been becoming more stabilized within the last week, with Mizzima's estimate not changing in over a week, I think we should remove the round-down soon. Quake1234 (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Not done - content is already there. It already says 80 from the VPA and 26 from Ministry of Public Security. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 02:47, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
Done - though I've edited it down in details and incorporated the Dawn article by Ninja Strikers about addition 35 tons as well. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 20:45, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
