Talk:Victoria Hall disaster
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
- Add new text under old text.
- New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.
- Assume good faith
- Be polite and avoid personal attacks
- Be welcoming to newcomers
- Seek dispute resolution if needed
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Naming should follow the sources or, at least, should be discussed.
The very idea to make some collateral changes in some page very slightly related to the 2015 Mina disaster is probably a bad idea: it suggests that you are trying to influence a discussion in progress and this only by using unjustified procedural means.
Nevertheless, I agree that sometimes, somewhere, over-referrencing was to be addressed. I have keept theses changes. Pldx1 (talk) 15:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC) Reply
- No, your assumptions about my motive are wrong, and you have clearly acted with a lack of AGF. The decision there had no influence on changing the word 'disaster' to 'stampede'. 'Stampede' is more precise, not a euphemism like 'disaster', and accords with common usage. Therefore I think the words should probably be changed back again. However, I have better things to do. zzz (talk) 16:10, 10 October 2015 (UTC) Reply
An article which links to this, the article on Human crushes, gives this as an example of such, and contains an entire section which would discourage using the term "stampede" in this scenario. Should the article be renamed "Victoria Hall disaster", as it was originally called? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.249.69.197 (talk) 11:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC) Reply
This page was moved without discussion in September 2015 with the edit summary euphemism. Whether that is true or not, it is no reason to move the page from a stable title which accords to WP:TITLE, ie. the name that is most commonly used... in a significant majority of reliable sources. Here the term 'disaster' outnumbers 'stampede' by 5 to 2, with other |non-judgemental terms (tragedy, calamity) also in use. So I've moved it back. If anyone is unhappy with this I suggest it be taken to WP:RM for a wider discussion. Moonraker12 (talk) 16:34, 29 September 2019 (UTC) Reply
I changed every use of stampede to crowd crush as this is the correct modern term. It better describes what happens to a reader who doesn't know about crowd dynamics. Many of the references including contemporary accounts refers to the incident as a stampede, it may be good to call out this distinction. Lotu (talk) 12:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC) Reply
- Selected anniversaries (June 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2011)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2013)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2015)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2016)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2018)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2021)
- Selected anniversaries (June 2026)
- C-Class Disaster management articles
- Unknown-importance Disaster management articles
- C-Class Death articles
- Unknown-importance Death articles
- C-Class North East England articles
- Mid-importance North East England articles