Talk:Landslide

message: 66.167.136.87 21:36, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If mudslide is redirected to landslide, then so too should all other geomorphological processes under the banner of landslide. That's probably a good thing, because juxtaposition is a powerful illustrative tool, and the processes are pretty much the same. However, it should be done mindful of the fact that mudslides and landslides are not synonymous. The rheology of mudslides is quite particular - mud. Not all regolith is mud, or capable of forming mud, but the term landslide does refer to regolith in general. I should also add that landslides are not all rock slides. The landslides so frequent in California involve rock and soil. Daniel Collins 04:54, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Oppose Content of mudslide is very likely to grow because of its importance to certain areas such as the south and west slopes of the San Gabriel Mountains north of Los Angeles. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Oppose Mudslides are a sub-set of landslides. --Ray 18:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Oppose per above. - Eagleamn 22:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Two articles are better. In theory there are a few common aspects, but neither in rheology, reasons and material, nor in practice. Additionally one should look at the "handling" differences e.g. in warning, surveying or protection, for appropriate monitoring etc. In the Alps also geomorphology is extremely different between a "classical" Landslide and very quick mudflows. Therefore we have to distinguish strictly between several geodynamic processes and phenomena. By the way: does anybody know the english word for the german/austrian "Plaike", an usual phenomenon at grassy alpine slopes? --Geof 22:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Since this is a lively, ongoing chat, here's some meat, from Hillslope Materials and Processes, Selby, 1993. Landslides are types of mass wasting that have a distinct plane or zone of sliding. This exlucdes falls, topples, creep, and flows. (This contrasts with what I previously wrote.) Et voila! No merge. Daniel Collins 23:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mmm, it seems the consensus is for no merge. I tend to agree with that. My argument was rather flawed, basing it on incorrect WP info, sorry about that. I'll removed the merge tags, so the discussion is complete.--Commander Keane 01:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: Surely, that picture is not taken in Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil! --Drdan 07:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture location 

message: The term Landslide is a general term for a perceptable movement of material down a slope.  It is a type of Mass Wasting.  There are lots of different types:
Creep,
Solifuction,
A Fall,
Slumps,
Slides.
Also includes "flows" eg:
Debris and slurry flows (Water-saturated sediment),
Mud Flows (Lahars, Granular Flows etc),
Debris Avalanches.
::Scree, anybody? I have searched the entire page and no mention of the word scree. In any case, there are published classifications of mass movements and Wikipedia should try to stick to those, IMO. Basically a distinction has to be made in block movements on the one hand, and screes and flows on the other. Screes are particle supported while flows are liquid supported. A landslide is a slide, that is a block movement over a failure plane (which can have different shapes). The generic term is mass movement, not landslide. Then, let us not forget mass movements under water, sub-marine slides, sub-marine screes, and - no, not sub-marine flow, but turbidity current. This is a whole science. (Incidentally, it is called geomorphology or geology, depending on your POV.) --Lindorm 21:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landslide 

message: can you show me a graph of increase and decrease of landslides —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.52.213.250 (talk) 01:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  landslides 

message: It looks like this (Landslide) article and Landslide classification have been evolved surprisingly independently and there are both overlaps and inconsistencies. In addition, the above opinion of User:Lindorm remains unaddressed for over a year. I am placing the tag "expert". Laudak 18:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification

message: The current lists of landslides are getting out of hand. Most of the 20th century and 21st century ones are unsupported by any sources. Ideally we should end up with no lists here at all, they should have their own articles. This is what happened with the various earthquake lists in the earthquake article as the lists dominated the page. When transferred to lists, sources will be needed (as they should be here). It would be quite reasonable, if a little harsh, to remove all unsourced landslides from the article as it stands. Better probably to allow these to stay for now as the basis for separate list articles. Mikenorton (talk) 14:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on the overwhelming and immediate level of support for this proposal (sarcasm warning), I've gone ahead and created a List of landslides article. It contains all of those from before the 20th century and I've made a start on more recent ones. I will be adding those from the current article that have sources or their own articles. Finding sources for all those with a 'citation needed' tag is a major task that I will probably spend some time on but how far I get depends on how much time and energy I have, but if anyone else wants to lend a hand..... Mikenorton (talk) 16:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a start at checking the mass of uncited landslides - if I find a source then I add them to the list of landslides, if not, they go. Mikenorton (talk) 23:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists of Landslides 

message: I have linked to the blog written by Professor David Petley, who is the Wilson Professor, Department of Geography, Durham University, England   .  Durham is one of the top UK universities , and Prof Petley an academic with a long history in the field, so the source is completely reliable.  I'm not sure what the rule is on blogs - if it was published as his own website rather than a blog I'm sure there wouldn't be a problem with including it in the external links.  Anyhow, enjoy!  It has lots of links to PDFs of articles etc. 86.147.162.38 (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that info, which helps. Blogs by recognized experts are a special case and are usually allowed.   Will Beback  talk   21:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: NASA quotes from his blog (,  and other examples) so there shouldn't be any problem with accepting his blog as a source. 86.133.53.54 (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useful website with many photos and videos 

message: thumb|left|The small landslide in the Aille River Doolin.JPG
thumb|right|The big landslide in the Aille River Doolin.JPG
Two pictures of landslides in the Aille River at Doolin, County Clare, Republic of Ireland. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 22:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useful pictures? 

message: This article needs to explain the differences in meaning of similar terms and whether they are used as synonyms in the media. 
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2006_Southern_Leyte_mudslide#mudslide_or_landslide.3F --Espoo (talk) 09:55, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing explanation of differences between landslide and mudslide/mudflow 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Landslide. 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/20110706221400/http://www.angewandte-geologie.ch/Archiv/Volumes/vol112.htm to http://www.angewandte-geologie.ch/Archiv/Volumes/vol112.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100824060054/http://www.easyseosolution.com/blog/archives/932 to http://www.easyseosolution.com/blog/archives/932
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020325150633/http://landslides.usgs.gov/ to http://landslides.usgs.gov/
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) 21:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, I wanted to add a citation on the first line. The link talks about how mudslides are formed. Here's the link: https://wonderopolis.org/wonder/what-causes-mudslides ItsRainin'Sushi (talk) 02:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Thank you, but the source does not seem to be reliable enough. Gulumeemee (talk) 08:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2018 

message: "The term landslide or, less frequently, landslip,[1] refers to"</br>
Should there be a comma after "landslip"? Or before "or"?--Adûnâi (talk) 04:04, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commas 

message: As far as gravity phenomena classification on Mars planet is not a hot topic (not a troll, but sorry, I don't understand the problem that came to the article semi-protection…), the last image in the present article is captioned as "landslide". But in its commons title &caption it is named "avalanche", following the title of the original NASA article. I don't know the english geologists positions in the current debate, but as a (french) geologist and exo-geologist, I use to make a little difference between avalanche and landslide ; the left part of the picture, which shows the upper layers of the scopulus/cliff, does not show any deep scar ("niche d'arrachement" in french), but a surficial one, visibly only involving the upper layer, therefore the name choice. Best regards. -- Eric.LEWIN (d), 2020-11-19, 23:47 CET.  — Preceding undated comment added 22:48, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avalanche