Talk:List of disasters in New Zealand by death toll

message: I would like to explicitly exclude disease outbreaks from this article's scope. The list's coverage of these is currently very incomplete - the 1918 influenza outbreak is the only one mentioned, and there must have been dozens in New Zealand's history. It also seems hard to find authoritative death tolls for them, especially ones involving Maori in the 19th century, despite their massive death toll. I suspect many outbreaks with 10 or more deaths will have simply gone unnoticed. It is also arguable whether they constitute definite "incidents" in the same way as the other events in this list. For example, the recent meningococcal epidemic has lasted more than a decade, and despite some searching I can't tell how many of the deaths from meningococcal disease over this period were due to the epidemic strain. Maybe a separate list would work, but I don't think disease outbreaks fit well into this one. -- Avenue (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one has objected, I'll go ahead with this. -- Avenue (talk) 00:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epidemics 

message: I'd like to suggest changing the image configuration from its current "sawtooth" arrangement. A couple of previous attempts to remove the upright option have been reverted, one reason given was keep the area the same. To me it looks a bit untidy/unprofessional, I don't think I've seen a newspaper or magazine use such a layout. The images are different heights, adding different widths as well makes it look rough, and generates whitespace gaps with the table. As alternatives to removing the upright option I can suggest:
* put all the landscape images together at the start or end of the stack
* List of disasters in Australia by death toll has a row of images beneath the tables
* add the upright option to all
* use only one type of image - landscape or portrait
XLerate (talk) 10:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the sawtooth arrangement is untidy and unnecessary. One type only is preferable, although forcing the same width for all might work. DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 11:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

text: I would suggest changing the layout a gallery at the bottom as is in use in other pages with many images.  TeigeRyan (talk) 04:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sawtooth image configuration 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Air New Zealand Flight 901.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Is this really a New Zealand disaster? NealeFamily (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The introduction does say this is a list of disasters that "occurred in New Zealand and its territories" [emphasis added]. While we could change the list's scope to exclude disasters in NZ territories, I wouldn't be in favour of that. It would rule out Air New Zealand flight TE901, for instance, which I think would be widely seen as an NZ disaster. --Avenue (talk) 22:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[MV Joyita]] 

message: A fishing boat with 248 people seeking asylum, reported to be heading to New Zealand from India, disappeared in 2019. These are not New Zealanders, but they were people who aspired or intended to become NZers, if the report is correct. This has some similarity to the loss of the Cospatrick on its way to NZ in 1874. Should we add this to the section "Significant incidents of New Zealanders being killed overseas" (and retitle it to "Significant incidents of New Zealanders or aspiring New Zealanders being killed overseas"), or is it too speculative?-gadfium 22:53, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't include them. Definitely not New Zealanders at the time of their assumed death, certainly no guarantee that they would even become so if they reached here and no certainty that NZ was in fact their destination. Different from the Cospatrick in that the passengers were British when they boarded and would have still been technically British once they arrived in New Zealand as NZ was still a British colony and its people therefore British citizens. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 23:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Asylum seekers