Talk:2022 Pakistan floods: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:04, 31 August 2022

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

A news item involving 2022 Pakistan floods was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 27 August 2022.

Wikipedia

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Disaster management C‑class Low‑importance

	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 articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pakistan: Balochistan / Sindh / Karachi C‑class Low‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Balochistan, Pakistan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sindh.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Karachi, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Pakistani history.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Punjab C‑class Low‑importance

	Punjab portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punjab, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Punjab 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.PunjabWikipedia:WikiProject PunjabTemplate:WikiProject PunjabPunjab-related articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Weather: Floods C‑class Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Floods task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Climate change C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change 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.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Proposed merge

Proposing merge from:

These are unmaintained stub articles, better presented as part of the whole. Gotitbro (talk) 06:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, they could be added under a subtopic "Major Areas Affected" or something of the likes. Uwynextdoor (talk) 06:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm agree with Uwynextdoor. Tajotep (talk) 16:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are those events important enough to have their own articles? Hemanth Nalluri 11 (talk) 11:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all those to this article. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Abbasi786786 (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is definite a be bold merge. Trillfendi (talk) 20:03, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seem to be part of the same event. If the main article ever becomes too large, they could be spun off again; at present a merge seems way better. --LordPeterII (talk) 21:56, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The articles are stub, so better to merge Sherenk1 (talk) 14:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per the reasons above. Johnson524 (Talk!) 14:35, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ibid above. InvadingInvader (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support it's the same monsoon season, for sure. If the details on some of the included articles get much more relevant and voluminous, this peculiar flooding can be extracted later again, combined with a short overview and a link. I would move this lemma to 2022 Pakistan summer monsoon floods, so it must not be renamed later, when there are more links to this and maybe winter floods. This seems unlikely, but the weather gets more loco every week… Horst Emscher (talk) 19:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - strongly. Same event, but for different areas/provinces. It's better to combine it into a single article. نعم البدل (talk) 23:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. RPSkokie (talk) 06:04, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, they can be be merged and redirected to this article. We can have separate sections for all the provinces. USaamo ^(t@lk) 08:47, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support multiple stubs, better to be combined into one single article. Gorebath (talk) 15:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The provinces covered in the stub articles are better suited for this overall article as of now and would better centralize efforts to document the floods. - Fluddulation! 16:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per WP:SIZERULE - micro stubs should be merged into an article that is decently sized, but not too long. It being a bit over 50 kB is ok if it is such a big disaster like this. 98.116.128.17 (talk) 18:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yeah of course, there's no need to have small articles/stubs like this when they should all be part of the bigger topic. Just make sure to include all the important details that the stubs talk about when you merge them/include them in the main article. Thanks, EagerBeaverPJ (talk) 22:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 * '''Support''' The provinces covered in the stub articles are better suited for this overall article as of now and would better centralize efforts to document the floods. [[User:Fluddulation25|- Fluddulation!]] 16:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  '''Support''' Per [[WP:SIZERULE]] - micro stubs should be merged into an article that is decently sized, but not too long. It being a bit over 50 kB is ok if it is such a big disaster like this. [[Special:Contributions/98.116.128.17|98.116.128.17]] ([[User talk:98.116.128.17|talk]]) 18:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
+* '''Support''' Yeah of course, there's no need to have small articles/stubs like this when they should all be part of the bigger topic. Just make sure to include all the important details that the stubs talk about when you merge them/include them in the main article. Thanks, [[User:EagerBeaverPJ|EagerBeaverPJ]] ([[User talk:EagerBeaverPJ|talk]]) 22:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)