Talk:2004 Boscastle flood

message: What responses were taken after the flood happened?
I have now added these - Marky7890 23:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Responses

message: 2m does not = 7ft. 10ft does not = 3m. Can't alter it to one or the other or a more accurate mean - maybe -  as I only was around to shovel muck the following week. Anyone? Plutonium27 21:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metric and Imperial measurements 

message: Why doesent anyone put the effects of boscastle flood on here ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.98.62 (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with the above IP comment: the article talks about the causes of the flood, and describes the timeline of clear-up, but says nothing about whether any lives were lost (OK, it's in the infobox), does not describe the events of the day, does not describe the damage. Someone just added a statement about the number of cars destroyed, which was deleted (misguidedly? perhaps because it didn't fit into "causes"?) as vandalism, but the info ought to be in here somewhere. Perhaps a section has been lost in the course of editing, though looking at the recent history doesn't offer a sudden drop in article length. Very strange. PamD (talk) 09:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Effects?

message: Atlantic Ocean not Atlantic Sea easy mistake
:There is no need to be so insulting. I've done the edit. --Salix (talk): 22:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 19 March 2013 

message: Dxisy baby (talk) 18:29, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Empty request. —KuyaBriBriTalk 18:35, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2014 

message: 1 day is not a date  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.46.169 (talk) 17:09, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks. Technical explanation: the infobox template offers a "duration" parameter, which the original editor duly filled in, but that's intended for start and end dates rather than a length of time. NebY (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: NOTE

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Boscastle flood of 2004. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050114210524/http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk:80/news/944736?lang=_e to http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/news/944736?lang=_e&theme=®ion=&subject=&searchfor=boscastle&any_all=&choose_order=&exactphrase=&withoutwords=
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have removed a whole swathe of geological and meteorological information that (IMHO) is excessively detailed and not relevant to the average Wikipedia reader who wishes to read about the flood, its causes and effects. I suspect that a lot of this material has been copied and pasted from a primary source, in violation of WP:NOFULLTEXT. Portnadler (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed excessively detailed geological information 

message: in the end of the boscastle flood it was disastrous and i think that boscastle is an obvious arget for floods...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.148.21 (talk) 17:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment