Talk:Hurricane Katrina/Archive 2

message: WDSU has just reported that the Harrison County, MS EOC has just reported 50 storm-related deaths.--Baylink 03:12, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While I can believe that number, we should wait for more confirmation - they heavily overestimated with Charley ("dozens" reported dead in Punta Gorda, in reality less than 10 died there). CrazyC83 03:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, it is now widely reported. For now, they should be listed as direct deaths unless an indirect cause is mentioned (i.e. building fire). CrazyC83 03:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harrison MS deaths 

message: Is there a better way to illustrate the chart of fatalities by state? An "inland" death chart listing (as of now) the single death in Georgia, and separated from the totals of Miss., La., Ala., and Fla. Seems to me these charts should be merged, but it wouldn't be appropriate under only coastal or inland headings. Thoughts?  --Twigboy 03:17, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The inland chart will likely grow as deaths from Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, New York and Ontario, among other states/provinces are eventually added... after all, Katrina has only just started affecting the inland areas. The listings will eventually grow. CrazyC83 03:26, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand, but my point is that the distinction between coastal/inland fatalities seems to be arbitrary. For example, Hinds County, MS appears to be more than 100 miles inland, yet it's listed as "coastal." Is it coastal just because it's in a state that has a Gulf coast?  --Twigboy 03:48, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Coastal states here are MS, AL, LA and FL - the states directly affected from the coastal impact. It is easiest to keep the states together (so, even if it happens in, say, Huntsville AL, it will go in the coastal list under Alabama). Inland states(/provinces) are everything else. CrazyC83 04:01, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There should be a table that present the total tally, coastal and inland. How about a new section call "Summary on casualities", just before the two sections?  --Vsion 04:12, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fatality charts 

message: CNN is reporting there is a two block wide breach in the 17th St Canal levee. Lake Pontchartrain is pouring into Orleans Parish. Water around Tulane University Hospital is rising one inch every minute. Won't put in article until corroborated online. --Golbez 06:38, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
: CNN has just reported it again, statement from the Army Corps of Engineers on the breach is expected within the next two hours. Also reported here (second article down): -Loren 07:40, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Per CNN 0302 CDT: Hospital evacuations temporarily placed on hold. Army Corps of Engineers currently in meeting discussing levee breach. -Loren 08:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 200 ft break confirmed by NOFD officials. -Loren 08:18, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Levee break 

message: I moved the section on "Previous Prediction" to Predictions of hurricane risk for New Orleans. I feel this is the most suitable section to be transfered. Ok?  --Vsion 07:42, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  moved section on "Previous Prediction"  

message: This section is still on the page: "Katrina may come close to the Ohio River Valley, even scraping southern Illinois, causing storms to rise from the remnants that are left behind."  The forecast track doesn't have it coming anywhere near there, instead crossing the Kentucky line around Hopkinsville and heading into Indiana or Ohio.  It hasn't been forecast to go through the Purchase or Illinois to my knowledge (if it does, good, we need the rain) - flood watches don't even cover any county north or west of Graves.  
Also, is it true that TVA is opening spillways?  I heard (as of Sunday) the rivers were low enough to impede barge traffic. 24.34.190.187 10:47, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  I checked local weather (I'm from the Purchase but living out of state) and saw the rainfall totals.  Not much except around Fort Massac, but they recorded bits of rain associated with the storm even in Missouri.  We didn't get much at all; now I'm more worried about river flooding and the effects on the economy. 24.34.190.187 03:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Katrina in S. Illinois and the Purchase? 

message: From the intro, last para:
.... and 80% of New Orleans is said to be under water. Currently 750,000 people are without power in the New Orleans area, and it may be several weeks before power is restored. The parts of the city with the worst flooding were in the east, where the storm was most severe. Roughly 40% of the city is under water...
I'm thinking it's one or the other, personally... J.K. 10:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I removed the 40% and put the 25 foot deep with the eighty percent. That's coming from an interview with the New Orleans mayor, though, for full disclosure, he said "The city of New Orleans is in a state of devastation. We probably have 80 percent of our city underwater. With some sections of our city, the water is as deep as 20 feet." So I guess we should just quote that directly, since he said probably, too. Dafrito 11:10, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea of the quote, but can you find a cite? J.K. 11:38, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  CNN cites it here, I believe.  Fifth paragraph or so. Dafrito 11:48, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text:  Reuters cites the quote here, too,  Dafrito 11:51, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text:  Yeah, here's the video of the interview.  Dafrito 11:55, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro inconsistency 

message: Should we summarize all that into one paragraph or a series of paragraphs, or is it our intention to keep the reports mostly chronological? Dafrito 13:11, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it makes sense to refactor all of the information into a series of paragraphs, but I think that would be hard to do at this time. I would find it hard to know what to keep, especially with all of the rapid changes that are occurring. It's probably a better idea to wait until the flow of information slows down before massaging it into a more encyclopedic form.  That being said, be bold. --timc | Talk 14:44, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Orleans damage report

message: AP reports up to 80 deaths in harrison county alone. So I changed the number to 54-80 people killed in the deaths chart. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050830/ap_on_re_us/hurricane_katrina_3;_ylt=An2t.4FWAg4ftOwvj9yMQYsbLisB;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl Leave it for now.
:I just updated all the lists to show that (64-90 direct deaths total). If anything says "up to", it is definitely best to show it the way you did, as a range. CrazyC83 15:59, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The AP report said that it is the MS governor who gave this figure 50-80. I've updated the Mississippi section on this. When changing the fatalities chart, please update the relevant region section also, so that other can verify what's the source and time-stamp, and know how to update it when things changes. thks. --Vsion 21:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text: This source  has that also. --Vsion 18:55, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Higher death tolls 

message: Does anyone know what kind of damage has the French Quarter sustained? It seems to be missing from the article. --129.219.6.86 19:55, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is being reported that it has started to flood, even though it was dry last night.  Zzxcnet 19:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Indeed; WDSU(/WAPT) showed tape last night from a corner approximately 3 blocks from their studios with dry streets.--71.100.10.116 20:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Does anyone have a page to which we can refer to add that information to the article? --Titoxd 21:11, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have video archives of WDSU and WWL-TV that I've saved from the live streams since before the storm hit.  I can get segments of this to use as source material if neccessary.  Zzxcnet 21:46, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  French Quarter 

message: Would a Category be useful here?  Not sure if such would be useful long term, but in the short term I would think it would be very useful to have a single way to link articles for the variuos effected areas, and other related articles.  But I wanted to gage opinion before I just went and created just a thing. TexasAndroid 21:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hurricane Katrina category 

message: There is now a need for a separate article on Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans as the section is expanding fast; leave a summary on this page instead. I need to rush to another place, can someone help to do it? thks. --Vsion 22:06, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that a seperate article would be needed for this, however I lack the experience to do this myself, on a page as important as this one. The fate of the city lies in fixing the breeched levees, and efforts to fix it are underway now. I suppose quite a lot of information about this will come in in the next few hours/night, and the situation at the superdome also will generate text. Also it will relieve the main page from the specific New Orleans situation. bsod 22:37, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

text: On Florida? I don't know about that; it's not big enough for that. There will need to be a template to handle all of this. Either way, I took care of the New Orleans article joturner 23:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think this isn't necessarily a good idea. This kind of content will eventually reappear at this page, because of the prominence of the story and editors' desire to add new information. I'd like if the content were returned. --Titoxd 23:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry, from the experience of Indian Ocean Tsunami, and 7 July London Bombing; this will work out. It's the level of details. The summary and the most important information will remain here, in fact, this paragraph will be similar to the lead section in the New Orleans page. Other local details will be on the New Orleans page itself. --Vsion 00:33, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see that it is working out. Keep up the good work! --Titoxd 00:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate page for New Orleans? 

message: As of me writing this, there are nine images in the Preparations and Storm History sections alone. That is obviously too many? Which should we get rid of? Edit: I think the one under transportation and military should be first to go. The one with the track is unnecessary since the wind swath image implies the track already. joturner 22:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Many Images 

message: Currently, it makes a lot of sense to edit this page with short or even single-sentence, "journalism"-style paragraphs, which indeed many people are doing. Once most of the initial reportage and shock gives way, however, this article will need to be redone from an encyclopedic standpoint. It will be a large task, which perhaps will require some coordination by admins or others. --Jacqui M Schedler 23:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Standards 

message: Some suggestions:
* Use the inverted pyramid style: Put the most important information up top. This applies to articles, sections and sub-sections
*For each section, the first paragraph should summarize the current status, especially on the casualties figure and dangerous floods condition.
*For each region, put information on casualties first, followed by floods condition, then on specific structural damages.
*For casualties, put information on confirmed deaths first, before the speculated/projected deaths. Please provide sources on all information. 
*If a section gets too large, it's time to create a new article for it. Leave the lead/summary paragraph on this page.
Feel free to append/modify the above inline --Vsion 00:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing guidelines 

message: Does crossing one of the Great Lakes and hitting land on the other side count as a landfall? CrazyC83 00:26, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landfall question 

message: Little has been said yet of what will be one of the greatest public health emergencies in decades. No clean water, no working sewers, no electricity, no telephones, no cell phone services, closed-down hospitals, filthy dirty septic/toxic floodwater contaminating everything everywhere, etc. I am speaking of old horrors like typhoid, cholera, and other diarrheal diseases, not to mention skin infections, untreated injuries, etc. It's a horror story in the making. Perhaps another article: Public Health Effects of Hurricane Katrina.
:I just heard Tulane University Hospital lost its backup generator. They are in the dark. There are still lots of sick people there. This is a genuine public health catastrophe. --FourthAve 01:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Public Health

message: thought i'd go out on a limb here and make a pitch, this article has a LOT of info, so much so that it really takes away from the article itself.  I'm putting forth that one page be devoted to the actual meteorological history of Katrina, including records and such, with a round up of all the damages and effects.  The second page, of which the effects on New Orleans was a good precursor - could be named Hurricane Katirna Aftermath.   Just a thought... any other ideas, suggestions? Boort 00:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I created an article to summarize the reports of damage to public facilities and infrastructure. There is still so much that isn't reported yet. --Twigboy 03:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposals for cleaning up the Article 

message: CNN and WWL are reporting that inmates at Orleans Parish Prison are rioting and have taken hostages, including the wife and children of a deputy, who took them there for safety.--YoungFreud 00:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Confirmed by ABC News, see . A news conference will be held at 9PM EST (right about now), according to ABC News. Flcelloguy | A  note? | Desk  01:00, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't see this press conference anywhere... did anyone see it?  (and hopefully someone has a recording/transcript for reference) Zzxcnet 02:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prison riot

message: Pump 6 (at the 17th St. Canal Levee) has now failed, as confirmed by Major C Ray Nagin on WWL-TV.  This pump had been partially offsetting the levee breach.  Since the sandbagging effort has failed, major flooding is expected.  I think this deserves a mention on the main article page.  I've already added it to the New Orleans effects page.  This announcement came shortly after 8:00pm CDT.  Zzxcnet 01:27, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead. Be bold. --Titoxd 01:35, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes go ahead, it's worthy. Good thing about having a separate article on New Orleans is that, even if others remove the content in this page for trimming, they don't have to worry about losing that information, as it's still preserved in the "children" pages. Keep updating what's heard from TV. --Vsion 01:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I've added it.  The effort at blocking the flooding has been all but abandoned, as the breach is expected to worsen in the overnight hours, putting the entire city at the Lake Pontchartrain's water level.  With no pumping capacity, the water will flow into the city without limit.  Zzxcnet 02:04, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Major''' flooding expected in New Orleans 

message: thanks Tixod for cleaning up this mess.  Reported vandalism.Kyle Andrew Brown 01:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism User:Tewdrig 

message: One thing I don't understand. How can the water level goes up a few feets above sea level? Any clue? --Vsion 01:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, not being a NOAA oceanographer my way of saying it is that in New Orleans they are at sea level.  The water level in the Gulf/Mississippi River  rises above the normal surface level, there probably a scientific word for that, like when they say mean tide is at such and such time.  The water then has to go somewhere and over the land it would be "above sea level."Kyle Andrew Brown 01:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water level above sea level? 

message: According to this report on NOLA.com, the Louisiana state Attorney General's office has said that no such term as "martial law" exists in Louisiana; from the text of the article it would seem that "state of emergency" would be more accurate. I haven't done any editing on this because I have no specialist knowledge, and really don't know anything more than what the aforementioned NOLA.com piece says. Loganberry (Talk) 02:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Martial law - incorrect term? 

message: Government officials are already considering taking these stranded people out of New Orleans/Hell's Half Acre. I've heard some pretty wild ideas about how to remove these people from this hell hole. One was to use cruise ships to take them to other ports on the Gulf coast (Galveston, Pensacola, Tampa, etc.) I guess we should use any means possible but what does everyone else think?
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Evacuation Methods

message: The casualty chart is for confirmed death only. Please do not include prediction or speculated figure. No doubt, this will make it way off the final figure, but it's the only way to update the chart consistently and to keep the figure verifiable. --Vsion 07:00, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Final figure?  Won't be seeing one for a couple months...maybe not until a year 207.30.145.6 11:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

text: If there is a confirmed and a speculated number (not a rough guess, like more than Camille) by a government agency, I think it should be shown as a range, with the lower number being the confirmed toll and the higher number being the speculated toll. CrazyC83 14:47, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Official casualty projection/speculation can still be documented in the text. But because different people will make differing estimation, there will be many different number. Often in diaster, these speculations tend to over-estimate the final death toll. It's therefore difficult to update the chart with these figures.  Instead, could we put a footnote at the bottom of the chart to indicate that those numbers refer to confirmed deaths only, and that the projected death may be much higher? --Vsion 17:08, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  casualty chart is for confirmed death only 

message: Section 2.1 ("Preparations and expectations before landfall/New Orleans") mentions that the Mayor of New Orleans ordered the city's first mandatory evacuation.  When was this done?  Could the date (and preferably the time) be added to the article?  I was very interested in how long before the storm citizens had official warning of it, and this information would be helpful.  Thanks! -- Creidieki 12:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The "mandatory" evacuation (in reality, short of a declaration of martial law, authorities could not force people to leave) was ordered by Mayor Nagin in a news conference that he gave about 10am Sunday . This is the NOAA report of about the same time ; Katrina went Cat4 early in the morning and Cat5 by 7am. It was known Saturday that the storm would hit roughly around Louisiana, but it wasn't until Sunday that the strength was known. --Dhartung | Talk 16:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a brave decision to order mandatory evacuation, and this single decision has saved tens (if not hundreds) thousands of lives. Credits to the Mayor and the Storm Trackers (whoever they are)! --Vsion 17:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Q:When was evacuation ordered? 

message: How come there has been no mention of Ham radio in this article in the Response section 63.210.193.178 01:12, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ham Radio Response

message: If you aren't here to help an encyclopedia, read, don't write. This is not a blog. WAS 4.250 15:08, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a blog

message: "Remember what we are doing here. We are building a free encyclopedia for every single person on the planet. We are trying to do it in an atmosphere of fun, love, and respect for others. We try to be kind to others, thoughtful in our actions, and professional in our approach to our responsibilities." Jimbo Wales 16:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: About Wikipedia

message: Can someone update the status preferably with links ? It would be nice to have confirmation they survived Katrina.
:They're in underground salt mines, there is little question they would "survive", although it's possible that the Louisiana facility experienced surface damage. There are other locations in Texas, though. --Dhartung | Talk 19:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Only the Bayou Choctaw facility near Baton Rouge was at risk. The other three (near Freeport, TX; Winnie, TX; and Lake Charles, LA) were completely unaffected. -- Cyrius|✎ 13:08, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategic Petroleum Reserve along Gulf 

message: Working largely from one NYT article, I cobbled together the framework of a Response section, which I expect will quickly expand. I'm looking to articles like 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake for inspiration, here. I'm not expecting this article to perfectly rival that one, but the US impact is going to be considerable and I wouldn't be surprised if this article also spawns sub-articles. --Dhartung | Talk 09:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Restored above which was accidentally deleted amid the kerfuffle. --Dhartung | Talk 16:30, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response 

message: I have friend right outside LA and said "it could like those hurricanes in the early 1900's??" It is very sad situation.
:Well, in 1900 the buildings were not so massively built like today; and in 1900 there were only telegraphs to coordinate disaster reliefs. But Galveston was only a small village, compared to New Orleans... Aren't there reference data from Chinese floods? Or from tsunami regions where the coast was populated as dense as in New Orleans? It's interesting that in Europe where hurricanes can't form, private homes are mostly built from concrete, not wood... --Keimzelle 19:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How high can the casulties go? 

message: No reports of deaths in Hancock County, Mississippi? Or have they just not been able to get out there to search as of yet? Mike H (Talking is hot) 17:36, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
I say they have not gotten to that stage yet.
:Somewhere I heard that they are currently looking and hadn't found anyone dead in Hancock County yet. It is a mostly rural county, with no town larger than 10,000, and hence it would be much easier to evacuate, and CNN yesterday said that they reportedly managed to get 99% of the population out. I wouldn't expect nearly as many dead in Hancock (or Jackson) County as in Harrison County or Greater New Orleans. CrazyC83 19:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hancock Co.

message: In the section on tornados it states there are no deaths reported yet, but in the section on Georgia it reports a fatal tornado.  Which report is true? Chuck Y 18:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2 deaths in Georgia were indirect deaths related to traffic accidents partially caused by the tornado (and probably the slick roads as well). Notice in the GA death numbers they are shown as such. CrazyC83 19:10, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tornado inconsistency? 

message: Considering hurricane damages and economic loss may total more than 1yr budget of US military spending, may this bring an early end to Iraq occupation as something that cannot be afforded any more? Uncle Sam will have to cough up huge sums to rebuild everything and the republican riches certainly do not want to pay more taxes. Leaving Iraq would save near a billion bucks a day. Is this to be discussed under "other effects"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.70.32.136 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No crystal ball, please. --Vsion 18:59, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They should consider moving structures that can't be saved (or structures that will need a lot of work and could be moved as part of that work) to ground that wasn't already sinking into the Gulf.  --chaizzilla 16:14, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Will Katrina repel USA from Iraq? 

message: It is a bad idea to move this entire section away. Furthermore, no summary is provided here. We should instead move the section on Hurricane Katrina effects on oil industry, because it is an isolated, well-defined topic. --Vsion 20:27, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving "Hurricane Katrina effects by region"? 

message: here's a bloomberg.com piece with a bunch of good categorized factual rollup data.--Baylink 23:15, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bloomberg article 

message: humor is important to history but I understnad your not wanting this to be on the Hurricane Katrina page.
http://www.illwillpress.com/kat.html
any idea where it should go?
: Not in Wikipedia. This is not encyclopedic. --Titoxd 01:20, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  However, the Jib Jab cartoons gained national, and even international recognition. You can't compare them to an illwill blog. --Titoxd 01:40, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Still non-notable. BTW, it isn't that funny to begin with. --Titoxd 02:22, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't think it should be in the article, but it is funny as hell and a good point if you think about it.--mitrebox 03:22, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

text: What information is contain there? Why should the world know about it? --Vsion 05:08, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  humor is important to history 

message: There's word of internet opportunists trying to scam folks donating to Katrina relief efforts. . It should be mentioned, and that people who want to help should go to fema.gov for a list of reputable charities.--YoungFreud 03:46, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Scam Sites

message: Is that death toll reliable 1013 people???
: Couldn't find source on this, so took it out until source is known. --Vsion 05:03, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  SOURCE OF FEMA ESTIMATE?? 

message: A lot of the Other Effects section should be in Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans. Some of the rest should be in Hurricane Katrina effects by region. And what's left could be merged with the previous section, which needs a better summary of those daughter articles. Rd232 13:49, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yes, Death toll (summary) is logically part of Effects too. Rd232 13:52, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Some newbies are creating sections, subsections, and even articles willy-nilly. Feel free to be bold in repairing poor factoring decisions. --Dhartung | Talk 17:23, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also feel free to discuss these issues on the Talk pages (rather than announce they exist), so that newbies like me can understand why these are poor factoring decisions. --Twigboy 19:14, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure 

message: Please, when comparing the costs of one event/product/disaster to another, use an inflation calculator to accurately represent past or future (in a historical article) value.  Already in this article is talk about beating Hurricane Andrew in "costs".  This has been stated in the media and by officials.  However, adjusted for inflation, Andrew cost ~36B in 2005 USD.  People need to stop looking a money's value as a constant over time.  It could be denoted as "Hurricane Andrew cost $36B USD|2005 ($26B USD|1999)" or something to that effect.  It is the most accurate way of presenting the facts, rather than the most sensationalistic. 70.185.243.67 21:24, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you compute the inflation-adjusted figure? --Vsion 21:28, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are several inflation calculators on the Internet, here is the one I use: http://www.westegg.com/inflation . All calculations should be adjusted to 2005 dollars. (I haven't adjusted 2003 and 2004 storms yet due to insignificant differences) CrazyC83 00:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparing Costs of Disasters (and events,products) 

message: External links are way out of hand on this article. I would hope some of the people who've been working on this article are keeping an eye out and monitoring for linkspam, but there really do seem to be far too many links. Here's a radical suggestion: get rid of all of them. I don't mean the inline citations by the way - we need to cite sources, but useless blog posts and random news articles (thousands and thousands must have been written) really don't belong. People are perfectly able to search the web or take a look at a news site if they want more information. How about it? Or at least get rid of most of them and leave about five to ten important, imformative, and relevant sites. — Trilobite 22:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Get rid of all the blogs as per WP:NOT. Then go over the news links and delete outdated ones. --Titoxd 23:43, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was BOLD and removed several of them (not all—I left the "Bringing resources together" blog). I misquoted the policy I'm following in the edit summary, though: my reasoning is WP:NOT 1.5.1, not 1.7.2. --Titoxd 23:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My perception of the informal policy on such issues on pages of popular current significance has been that such things were at least passably on-topic while the event *was* still of such current significance.  Are they really *that* useless that we need to pull them at this moment?  My personal opinion would be to err on the side of informativeness, for the short term, at least.--Baylink 00:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, but there is a point at which having too many links just overwhelms the reader and he/she doesn't click on any of them. Please check if the links are really useful before letting them on the article. Having a few links (preferably to official information) is better than doing a google search (which by the sheer volume of links, is what we're doing). --Titoxd 01:48, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It would also help to start breaking out sub-articles where practicable - some of these links are very specific to concepts that could stand alone in an article. -- BD2412 talk 02:08, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now started an article on Political effects of Hurricane Katrina, to which some links can be moved. -- BD2412 talk 03:03, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: It's a little south-east asian tsunami.It's very sad!On the Tv we can believe that the images are from Haiti or Africa.Very sad! Gautier Bichard 23:17, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the same idea. If it was a real tsunami though, the entire Gulf coast from the tip of Florida to the Yucatan, as well as much of the Caribbean and Central America, would have been affected. Thankfully, AFAIK, there are no fault lines below the Gulf of Mexico. CrazyC83 00:58, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Atlantic has La Palma, though. ~~ N (t/c) 01:06, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Tsunami

message: Anyone see the aftermath in the Gulf Coast as the Mad Max/Road Warrior  Trilogy?
:Yeah. I have the temptation to go down there and start helping stranded people and killing the asshats who are shooting at rescue helicopters. :-P ~~ N (t/c) 00:23, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road Warrior  Trilogy 

message: Wikipedia is one of the few sites that might have the bandwidth available, software architecture and information management to assist the people in the Gulf Coast area. Wikipedia could set up a coordination wiki, where people can list the names of their family, report their current personal conditions, and allow, via a Search component, to quickly locate information. Wikipedia and other Wikimedia sites have been instrumental in their coverage of this calamity. I know that this is well outside the mission of WP, but is there any consideration among the Wikipedia "management" to offering some sort of additional resource to help with the rescue and recovery efforts? --NightMonkey 02:09, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
: It's a good idea. Try asking Jimbo about this, he's the founder of Wikipedia, President of the Wikimedia Foundation, steward of meta-wiki and a whole bunch of other titles I can't remember. If a single guy can do it, he can. --Titoxd 02:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Exists already. ~~ N (t/c) 13:57, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can Wikipedia help out? 

message: Why was the professional sports section taken out? if no one has a good reason, it should be put back in. Xunflash 02:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was moved to Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans. --Titoxd 03:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Professional Sports

message: :President Bush has temporarily waived the Jones Act to allow foreign oil companies to ship oil to the United States.
The link to the Jones Act goes to a disambiguation page, one entry regarding Puerto Rico and another regarding workmens comp.  I presume that the Jones Act that this article refers to is a third option? --Bletch 03:07, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's the second one.  At least, the text on that page seems to say so.  I disambiguated the link. --timc | Talk 03:14, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jones Act 

message: Can we get a proper death toll. A lot of people are using this page as information.
* The thing is, we are only as accurate as the sources we can find. We're looking all over the place for official casualty estimates, and we update them as we can find them. Sometimes, our sources contradict themselves, and we're stuck. After all, we don't have our own independent news agency, a la Associated Press or Reuters... hmm... that's an idea. :) --Titoxd 03:51, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Then that's probably a typo. Where's that? I'll look into it and I'll try to fix it. --Titoxd 04:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm curious how they will classify those killed in the post-Katrina flooding, if they will be direct or indirect deaths? CrazyC83 04:20, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would say direct, since flooding is one of the main effects of a hurricane, but then, that's just me. --Titoxd 05:43, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A better casulties list 

message: I suggest that we immediately break out the lengthy section on "Effects outside the affected region" (which is virtually all economic effects). -- BD2412 talk 04:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break out '''Economic Effects''' 

message: I'm just wondering where and whether we should include this
* Nah. It's an exaggeration. The FEMA site is just linking all the recognized donation efforts that have been reported to the agency, and Sploid is twisting the whole thing. --Titoxd 05:42, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operation blessing? 

message: hurricane katrina is a stage 5 hurricane that hit the city of new orleans  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hockey2007333 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. Please realize that talk-pages are WP: Notaforum though, and that the article already states that Katrina was a category 5 hurricane that affected the city of New Orleans.n🌀Weatherman27🏈 (chat with me!).  19:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  hurricane katrina 

message: This number is the number of Dutch reported to be killed in the North Sea flood in 1953:
E.g., ``The biggest disaster in recent history is the flooding in February  1953.  Large  parts  of  the  Southwest  of  The Netherlands  were  flooded  and  1,836  people  died. Dutch Report p.248: http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/climate/docs/Dutch_Perspective_on_LA.pdf
It isunlikely that both floods would have the same number in both these regions.  Can you please confirm the source of that number in the New Orleans case?  From what I can tell, the citations are either grey material or peer reviewed but don't state that number.
:This appear to be a typo. The official number for Hurricane Katrina is 1,836. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total lives: 1,863?  Cf. Netherlands toll in 1953 North Sea flood 

message: I have noticed someone has changed the peak intensity image so I have reverted it to the original as the image before the revert I made was not peak intensity. The image was Katrina weakening as it approached Louisiana.
but this happened along long time ago ±×−  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6011:6142:5E00:9D5B:2592:CAC6:A230 (talk) 14:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peak intensity image 

message: Dabdabad (talk) 13:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Run n Fly (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2021 

message: Hurricane Ida is nowhere near as costly as Katrina and Harvey, with only about $15 billion in damages. Please remove the section in the first paragraph stating that they are all tied. 71.41.254.202 (talk) 12:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021 

message: I have a better research and i am a news writer so please give me editing access 110.172.23.167 (talk) 07:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Cannolis (talk) 08:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2022 

message: I think you should be more specific about the number of fatalities.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asilber12 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specifics 

message: Today is hurricane Katrina’s 17 anniversary! 82.21.77.155 (talk) 13:47, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  August 29 

message: Please add  to Hurricane Katrina#Southeast United States 69.118.232.58 (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: United States Man (talk) 23:22, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2022 

message: Please update this article to reflect the cost of Hurricane Katrina adjusted for inflation. Hurricane Katrina, when adjusted for inflation, is the costliest hurricane in US history. Cost post inflation is important for understanding the economic impact of Hurricane Katrina in more contemporary times. Attached is a source from NOAA that should allow for the edits to be made. Thank you. 
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/dcmi.pdf BGeses (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2022 

message: The article mentions Kanye West saying "George Bush doesn't care care about black people." The wikilink for black people goes to Black people; please change it to say black people but go to African Americans because this is more precise and the assumed meaning when Americans say "black people" unless the context implies otherwise.
35.1.255.235 (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. mossypiglet (talk) Go blue! 19:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2022 

message: The article states "However, in February 2021, a severe winter storm struck the United States, causing at least $195 billion (2021 USD) in damage in Texas. It surpassed both Katrina and Harvey to become the single-costliest natural disaster recorded in the United States." This information is not aligned with current official understanding of American disaster costs; the February 2021 winter storm's official cost was 25.2 billion dollars, per https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/events/US/1980-2022?disasters[]=all-disasters. Please delete this statement from the article. 128.84.125.27 (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2022 

message: So scaryso so scary
 64.127.82.225 (talk) 20:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hurricane Katrina 

message: remove a ibtracs | ibtracs = 2005236N23285 now as wikidata 122.2.118.243 (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 12:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2023 

message: At the end of the second paragraph in the introduction section the text reads "due of sovereign immunity." Please change "of" to "to" in order to fix this grammar issue. BUFWXpYJKaI (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Cannolis (talk) 19:20, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2023 

message: The following statement is not accurate and should be removed: "However, in February 2021, a severe winter storm struck the United States, causing a major power failure in Houston, which caused at least $195 billion (2021 USD) in damage in Texas. It surpassed both Katrina and Harvey to become the single-costliest natural disaster recorded in the United States."
The true cost of the 2021 disaster was 26.3 billion per https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events/US/1980-2021 66.170.30.223 (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on Aug 29 2023 

message: The first paragraph in the article is misquoted. Katrina made landfall as a category 3 hurricane. After leaving Florida as a category 1, it strengthened to a category 5 out in the gulf, but weakened to a category 3 hurricane by the time it made landfall. The reference (#1) even states as such. The author incorrectly quoted the source information. Please refer to #1 reference report to verify this information. As stated in the report it states: "Katrina first caused fatalities and damage in southern Florida as a Category 1 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale. After reaching Category 5 intensity over the central Gulf of Mexico, Katrina weakened to Category 3 before making landfall on the northern Gulf coast."
Here is an additional link from USGS that also verifies this information:
 https://eros.usgs.gov/media-gallery/earthshot/hurricane-katrina-new-orleans-louisiana-usa#:~:text=On%20August%2028%2C%202005%2C%20Katrina,(200%20kilometers)%20per%20hour. Dseip77 (talk) 15:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Category 

message: The "Total Fatalities" section of this article says "1,392", which is the updated, and currently correct number, while the intro to this article says "1,836", which was the old death toll prediction. I am not allowed to make this edit as it is locked to my account. I would appreciate it if someone could do it for me. TheOne01oneO (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The death toll is written incorrectly