![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 9 September 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2011 Southwest blackout article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The lead needs to be rewritten. Northeast Blackout of 2003 can be used as an example.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
2011 Southern California power outage →
2011 Southwest blackout – Did the blackout also affect parts of Arizona and Mexico? If so, should the article be renamed to something like
2011 Southwest blackout?
serioushat
21:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
This was not the largest power outage in California History, in 1996 there were two major power outages that blacked out most of California. There should be some mention on the record time in which power was restored to San Diego, Mexico, Imperial Irrigation District and Arizona Public Service. there was over 6000MW of load interupted in this outage (1MW=approx750 homes/ less in summer) Investigation is ongoing as to the actual events that caused the blackout. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.200.60.7 ( talk) 08:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I wonder when the NERC investigation will release the facts about an entity not following standards and not protecting for n-1?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.231.58.3 ( talk) 07:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:San Diego Blackout 2011 (September 8).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC) |
Wasn't there just a RM to change the name, now it has another name? Is there a reason fir the new name, because I haven't heard this reference before-- JOJ Hutton 03:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Apparently the episode centers on the North Gila Substation of
Path 46, which seems to be out of
Arizona Public Service territory , so that needs some clarification.Path 46's article need some serious attention, starting with adding categories; likely so do other Paths, such as
Path 27.--
Pawyilee (
talk)
10:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
We just had a move discussion, as a result of which the page was moved to "2011 Southwest blackout". Then all of a sudden, without discussion or consensus, the page was moved again, to "Great Blackout of 2011". I disagree with that move. It does not follow the conventions of Category:Electric power blackouts and it is inappropriate. This was only the "great blackout" to the 7 million or so people who were affected by it. Even the Northeast Blackout of 2003 does not get a POV title like "Great blackout". I am going to reverse the move, leaving a redirect. Then if 08Ocean Beach SD wants to argue for the new name, let's do it here and reach consensus per usual Wikipedia policy. -- MelanieN ( talk) 14:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Dang it, OB, will you STOP changing article titles on your own, without discussion or consensus?!?!? The current title was the result of a "requested move" process and was reached after discussion. You can't just go ahead and change a consensus-based title like that on your whim!
You said you would move it "if there is no opposition", and then you went ahead and moved it, less than three hours after you proposed it, and without any input from anyone but me. (At least one person in the earlier discussion said "prefer year first followed by locale," you should have taken that as an "objection.") Three hours on a Sunday morning is not long enough to allow for discussion or objection or consensus. I would normally say to allow at least a week; the closing administrator of the earlier discussion here allowed eight days.
I'm not going to move it back this time, because as I said I am neutral. But I do feel you were out of line to ignore process once again, and I want you to respect the consensus system from now on. OK??? --
MelanieN (
talk)
05:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
To be consistent, can someone replace the current map image with an SVG one excluding Greenland, like the map used for the 2003 blackout? Can someone also do this for the 1965 blackout, with a redundant faraway Hawaii? serioushat 03:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
2011 Southwest blackout → Southwest Blackout of 2011 – Relisted. Vegaswikian ( talk) 20:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC) Simply put, this article should be moved to the proposed title because it is more in line with related blackout-articles in the United States. This may be a point of view, but the proposed title seems to be more formal. See Category:Electric power blackouts of the United States. Whatever the result of this RM is, the title format should be applied to all blackout-articles pertaining to the United States so their is some degree of consistency. 08OceanBeachS.D. 06:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Northeast blackout of 2003 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 19:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
The Analysis section states that federal investigators deemed the "protection settings" at San Onofre were "unnecessary". I read the cited the sections of the report and several surrounding pages and I don't see anything to support that statement. Am I missing something? Msgerbs ( talk) 20:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 9 September 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2011 Southwest blackout article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The lead needs to be rewritten. Northeast Blackout of 2003 can be used as an example.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
2011 Southern California power outage →
2011 Southwest blackout – Did the blackout also affect parts of Arizona and Mexico? If so, should the article be renamed to something like
2011 Southwest blackout?
serioushat
21:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
This was not the largest power outage in California History, in 1996 there were two major power outages that blacked out most of California. There should be some mention on the record time in which power was restored to San Diego, Mexico, Imperial Irrigation District and Arizona Public Service. there was over 6000MW of load interupted in this outage (1MW=approx750 homes/ less in summer) Investigation is ongoing as to the actual events that caused the blackout. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.200.60.7 ( talk) 08:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I wonder when the NERC investigation will release the facts about an entity not following standards and not protecting for n-1?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.231.58.3 ( talk) 07:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:San Diego Blackout 2011 (September 8).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC) |
Wasn't there just a RM to change the name, now it has another name? Is there a reason fir the new name, because I haven't heard this reference before-- JOJ Hutton 03:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Apparently the episode centers on the North Gila Substation of
Path 46, which seems to be out of
Arizona Public Service territory , so that needs some clarification.Path 46's article need some serious attention, starting with adding categories; likely so do other Paths, such as
Path 27.--
Pawyilee (
talk)
10:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
We just had a move discussion, as a result of which the page was moved to "2011 Southwest blackout". Then all of a sudden, without discussion or consensus, the page was moved again, to "Great Blackout of 2011". I disagree with that move. It does not follow the conventions of Category:Electric power blackouts and it is inappropriate. This was only the "great blackout" to the 7 million or so people who were affected by it. Even the Northeast Blackout of 2003 does not get a POV title like "Great blackout". I am going to reverse the move, leaving a redirect. Then if 08Ocean Beach SD wants to argue for the new name, let's do it here and reach consensus per usual Wikipedia policy. -- MelanieN ( talk) 14:49, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Dang it, OB, will you STOP changing article titles on your own, without discussion or consensus?!?!? The current title was the result of a "requested move" process and was reached after discussion. You can't just go ahead and change a consensus-based title like that on your whim!
You said you would move it "if there is no opposition", and then you went ahead and moved it, less than three hours after you proposed it, and without any input from anyone but me. (At least one person in the earlier discussion said "prefer year first followed by locale," you should have taken that as an "objection.") Three hours on a Sunday morning is not long enough to allow for discussion or objection or consensus. I would normally say to allow at least a week; the closing administrator of the earlier discussion here allowed eight days.
I'm not going to move it back this time, because as I said I am neutral. But I do feel you were out of line to ignore process once again, and I want you to respect the consensus system from now on. OK??? --
MelanieN (
talk)
05:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
To be consistent, can someone replace the current map image with an SVG one excluding Greenland, like the map used for the 2003 blackout? Can someone also do this for the 1965 blackout, with a redundant faraway Hawaii? serioushat 03:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
2011 Southwest blackout → Southwest Blackout of 2011 – Relisted. Vegaswikian ( talk) 20:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC) Simply put, this article should be moved to the proposed title because it is more in line with related blackout-articles in the United States. This may be a point of view, but the proposed title seems to be more formal. See Category:Electric power blackouts of the United States. Whatever the result of this RM is, the title format should be applied to all blackout-articles pertaining to the United States so their is some degree of consistency. 08OceanBeachS.D. 06:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Northeast blackout of 2003 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 19:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
The Analysis section states that federal investigators deemed the "protection settings" at San Onofre were "unnecessary". I read the cited the sections of the report and several surrounding pages and I don't see anything to support that statement. Am I missing something? Msgerbs ( talk) 20:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)