Talk:Hyatt Regency walkway collapse

message: Among the heroic efforts the night of the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse were those of doctors attending a Radiology convention who happened to be dining at the hotel. As a secretary for the Radiology Film division of Eastman Kodak in Houston, Texas, I was on the phone constantly the morning after the tragedy.  Sales reps from Eastman Kodak in Houston were attending the convention, showing doctors new film technology, and dining with them at the hotel that night.  Because so many doctors were at the hotel, medical assistance began immediately to the victims. The efforts by the radiologists and the coordination of medical help by the Eastman Kodak sales representatives were integral to the survival of victims and treatment of those injured.  The fact that many of the doctors and sales representatives had crossed the walkway moments earlier was a haunting reality.
:I've added references to Dr. Joseph Waeckerle. He had been the director of Kansas City's emergency medical system two years earlier and his successor was not available, so he headed to the Hyatt after a run after a full shift at a hospital. K8 fan (talk) 22:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyatt Regency walkway collapse/Crediting Heroes 

message: I tried to update the link to German wikipedia, which now is
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt#Katastrophe_in_Kansas_City
but I didn't get there to the left hand column for editing. I am logged in but it seems I am not allowed to go there.
(if you like, leave me message how to do it)
thanks,
Andreas
--Hundehalter (talk) 14:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry for asking stupid questions. I was somewhat blind not see it :-/   --Hundehalter (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to German WP needs correction 

message: I've reverted the addition of the "In Pop Culture" section per WP:NOR.  The link cited as a source allows you to watch the episode on imdb.  NOR says, "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so."  As I understand it, keeping this material would require a reliable secondary source claiming "episode X parodies event Y".  Kcowolf (talk) 00:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In Pop Culture" section 

message: A recent edit (Aug 30), along with a later edit, had changed the last sentence of the intro paragraph, introducing colloquial wording ("came down") and inaccuracy. I have essentially reinstated the previous wording. The Aug 30 edit and a later one introduced Arlington and the Pentagon. Although part of the Pentagon collapsed, few if any of the deaths were due to the collapse, which occurred half an hour after the airplane hit, so that mention does not belong in a sentence about structural collapses with many deaths. I did add the clarification (in the link text) that it was the south tower collapse which exceeded the Hilton collapse in deaths. I was unable to determine how the 630 deaths in the south tower broke down between those in the building killed directly by the airplane crash and those who died a few minutes later in the building collapse (it does not include those on the airplane), and don't have a copy of Petroski's book, and so don't know the exact number killed by the actual collapse, but I thought the uncertainty slight.
Paleolith (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  the next collapse 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hyatt Regency walkway collapse. 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/20110822141834/http://skywalk.kansascity.com/articles/20-years-later-fatal-disaster-remains-impossible-forget/ to http://skywalk.kansascity.com/articles/20-years-later-fatal-disaster-remains-impossible-forget/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:32, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: That is, was it poor design combined with heavy stress?  Cool Nerd (talk) 19:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was there dancing on the walkways? 

message: I would like to request that the article gets, if possible, a photo to show how the hotel looked before the disaster. I feel that this would greatly enhance readers' understanding of what has happened here. The current photos are informative anyway, but would be all the more useful when placed in the context of how it looked when it was all there. Any chance, please? Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-disaster photo 

message: The article claims that during the triaging after the collapse, mortally injured people were "told they were going to die" as they were given palliative morphine. This seems wildly implausible. It would be an act of extreme cruelty. Doctors are not generally so cruel to their patients. And just how many people would have been fatally injured, and yet conscious enough to comprehend this sadistic doctor telling them they were going to die?
So it's an extraordinary claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Two sources are given, one of which says something vaguely resembling the claim, and the other of which is a Google books page where the page of relevance is not part of the preview.
Without rock solid sourcing, the claim is dubious. And yet, there's an editor who seems desperate to keep it in. Perhaps they would like to explain why. 82.132.223.205 (talk) 20:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've always thought the statement was a bit bizarre myself, it's not any protocol I've ever heard of, and it should stay out unless it's supported by multiple independent sources. Acroterion (talk) 20:37, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to look at the context. Your analysis is synthesizing your own point of view. Based on your definition, you don't think this event is extraordinary in its own regard? Part of the relief effort involved making the ! The source states   You could add to the context that this isn't a usual circumstance. They had to conserve the sources they had. Also, not being able to verify the source would call for a dubious tag and not edit warring. – The Grid (talk)  21:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not a synthesis to question that claim. I'd really like to see multiple sources for the "told they were going to die" business - it is indeed an extraordinary claim that needs better sourcing. It's simply not a normal protocol in any circumstance, and should be treated with care - omission is the best course absent multiple concordant sources. There is no question about the rest - resources were indeed limited. Acroterion (talk) 21:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

text: Yeah so the source kinda acknowledges that this is not fully normal response to an extremely abnormal amd desperate situation. We dont know who was available onsite to do this telling to the dying, but everything was makeshift and improvised. They utilized anything fonated from anywhere, ramming through the doors with vehicles and borrowing salvage equipment from an open request to the public. Anyway, the course of action is not to delete but to specify that the info is according to this one particular source so far. — Smuckola(talk) 23:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see if there's similar accounts but I have a feeling I'm going to venture into citogenesis. – The Grid (talk)  21:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right. Acroterion (talk) 21:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I guess it's fine with the words omitted, I don't want to put a square peg in a round hole to put the words back as is. I still think it being reworded would help in the context. – The Grid (talk)  12:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

text: There's also a degree of BLP in play, since for the sake of surviving relatives of the victims, I'd want such a statement to be ironclad if it's included. Acroterion (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence 

message: Consider this free body diagram a draft of a complete explanation.  I think the one of the left is complete: The green arrows represent the force of gravity, mg, on each of the red floor structures.  And the two upward green arrows at the top are something holding this all up.  The red and black arrows are equal and opposite forces representing the interaction between each floor and the cable.  On the right we have an extra cable, and two opposite forces (red and magenta) are shown that maintain the extra cable in equilibrium.  This needs to be fixed in two ways: First some more forces need to be added.  Second, we need to modify the labeling to make this accessible to color-blind readers.--Guy vandegrift (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anybody interested in doing a proper freebody diagram for this? 

message: There seems to be an error in the graphic.  The left half, labeled original design, shows the welds connecting the 2 C-section beams together as being on the top & bottom of the resulting box beam.  But the text of the article (and the official investigation report, also) states that the original design had the box beam rotated 90 degrees, with the welds on the sides and the support rods and the nuts & washers through the solid center of the beam, rather than directly on the welds.  This change was a secondary cause of the collapse; had it not been made, the failure might have been less catastrophic.  
::Could we get this graphic corrected?  T bonham (talk) 06:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in graphic 

message: Wouldn't the collapse of the Alfred P. Murrah building in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing be deadlier? Seeing as both 9/11 and OKC were terror-related collapses. --Undescribed (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, just pick one place to write to. I'll just repeat here for the record what I said on my Talk page, that OKC is a bombing and not a collapse. Either way, the lead section is only for summarizing the existing fully-sourced body contents WP:LEAD WP:RS and not for guessing things on a vitally technical mature subject. — Smuckola(talk) 20:27, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deadliest since WTC collapse? 

message: Are there any sources that explain the difference in reported injuries? For example, ThinkReliability reports 216 injured and the NIST document reports 186. 202.18.108.111 (talk) 08:31, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualty count