This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Air travel disruption after the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption was copied or moved into Aftermath of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption with this edit on 07:55 17 April 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Recently a detailed list of UK ferries with increased passenger figures was added to this article. Shouldn't that rather go to the air travel disruptions article (if anywhere)? I would think that the focus on this article would be concrete disrupted events, not the transportation infrastructure itself. __ meco ( talk) 13:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I think we ought to change the name of this article for the reason given in the headline. __ meco ( talk) 13:14, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved (to include the month - discussion can continue as to whether it should be plural) Kotniski ( talk) 12:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Aftermath of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption →
Consequences of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption — Relisted 17:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC) Using the term aftermath is a misnomer. These are all consequences of an ongoing event. My suggestion is "Consequences on of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption". If others can think of better names still I have no objection to that. __
meco (
talk)
20:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Would not that be "during" the WWII? You could argue that Israel was created in the WWII aftermath, though. Ok, I think I see your point. Consequences does not have the "afterwards" implications aftermath does. However, I do not know if the difference is enough to make the change. Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Leirus Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
And then, if there are some changes in the policies about flying in this kind of conditions, we can make an "aftermath" section :) Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Leirus Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The arguments about hair loss and jews are rather lost on me I'm afraid. Returning to the debate about the name, the main candidates are "Aftermath of...", "Consequences of...." and "Effects of .....". If you type each of these terms into the search box on wikipedia to see the first few articles with these titles, you will notice that "consequences of" and "effects of" are mostly about things rather than events (e.g. "Consequences of special relativity"). The only one I could see that relates to a specific event was "effects of hurricane katrina". On the other hand, if you type in "aftermath of" they are all related to specific events. So based on the english definition and the way the phrase aftermath has been used before on wikipedia, the current title is more than adequate to describe the contents. There was an eruption on 14 April which resulted in a series of impacts in the aftermath of that event. There is a "current" tag on it to warn the reader that the events and consequences are ongoing so the reader cannot get confused and somehow believe that this is all in the dim and distant past. There are two objections above to the word aftermath and the reason given seems to be "I don't like the title". I think that a move proposal has to have a more concrete reason than just personal preference to change it. So again, I re-iterate my position as keep but welcome any further insight as to why Aftermath is a bad choice of word for the title of this article. ChrisUK ( talk) 20:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Change name I've changed my opinion after the merger discussion on the air travel disruption page. This article name needs to be in tune with that article as containing the indirect effects of the travel disruption. But I don't have a proposal though I'm afraid (and no, I don't think it should be "Indirect effects of the air travel disruption from ....." ChrisUK ( talk) 16:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Change name i believe that the the name needs changing but do not know what it should be changed to. NOTE: I added Cleanup-articletitle to the article and believe the merge tag should now be removed (but should possibly be added again in a month or so after the full extent of this event has finished). I have also stated this on the other article.
L blue l (
talk)
06:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree to a change. (Why has this discussion gone on longer than 7 days?) Airspace has again been closed in Ireland and Scotland in the last few days, and there is no indication that this will not occur again in the coming days and weeks. It's hard to think of an alternative title for this useful article, I think the best so far is Consequences of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruptions - note plural-- Lidos ( talk) 07:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC).
There should be more putang in the world he economic impact section. According to the news, the UK's groceries have been affected. Says that all groceries are flown into the UK... 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 09:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I recently placed a template on the cultural impacts section questioning whether all of the items listed there are important or relevant enough to be mention. This keeps being removed but I've replaced it because I fail to see how facts such as " Fark's Drew Curtis has been stranded in Armenia following a joint Fark/Reddit meetup" are important enough to be mentioned. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It's not generally good to have an encyclopaedia with present tense statements like "is affecting". The accuracy of the article should be timeliness, and not dependent on re-editing in future to maintain its accuracy. Stephen B Streater ( talk) 06:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Every cloud has a silver lining. There doesn't seem to be much on benefits. Hotels with people staying longer, video conferencing companies, freelance volcanologists. I'll have a look round this evening, but it's worth a section I think. Stephen B Streater ( talk) 15:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Is there a list, or a need for a list of places evacuated in any Eyjafjallajökull eruption related articles? Apparently the village of Fljótshlíð (new article) was evacuated. Is this more suited for the 2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull article? Ideas? -- 220.101.28.25 ( talk) 03:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this is worth adding or not, but Reuters published Scenarios: What if volcano disruption lasts weeks, months? Jodi.a.schneider ( talk) 11:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe that there is a strong case for trimming and removing a considerable amount of the content relating to the impact on individuals, in line with WP:NOTNEWS#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information.
For example this, Aftermath_of_the_2010_Eyjafjallajökull_eruption#Comedy B6kull_eruption#Comedy. Can anyone justify per specific policy or guideline the inclusion of this and many of the other impacts on individuals? Just because they are notable individuals surely does not require the detailed recording of impacts on them in otherwise unrelated notable articles. Leaky Caldron 13:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I've put the UEFA Champions League back in front of the Japanese Grand Prix as I think it is a more notable event. Google hits for "Japanese Grand Prix" only returns about 136,000 hits [3], whereas "UEFA Champions League" returns about 11,700,000 [4]. -- JD554 ( talk) 10:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Scratch that, I've just realised the UEFA matches weren't rescheduled. I'm not sure the teams making alternative travel plans is particularly noteworthy, this must be something that happens reasonably regularly for all sorts of reasons. -- JD554 ( talk) 12:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Not exactly consensus above. Many seem to think some type of change is needed due to the ongoing nature of the event, but this is moot without a viable alternative which shows a cause-effect relationship without requiring the event to be complete, even implicitly.
How about "Consequences of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.156.225 ( talk) 15:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
There is a very noticeable change in central-European weather ongoing, that is attributed by many (mostly lay) people to this eruption.
In the land (Czech Republic, Central Europe, "downwind" from Iceland), where the "normal" weather pattern could be described as: "two of nine days raining, with 100 completelly Sunny days per year", there is now (whole May 2010, still continuing and predicted at least until middle of June) more than a month of almost continuous rainy and cloudy weather, repeated floods (a "hundred year water" coming twice in a month in some places). The "wet" clouds came from west-African tropics earlier in May and circled arround for some time (as can be seen on EumetSat images), but the "bad" weather normally dissipates much more quickly... Now the tropical "swirl" has gone, but the "bad" weather still continues...Will Forshaw is sexy.
(Semi, 83.208.147.243 ( talk) 23:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC))
putang Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa ( talk) 23:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:42, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.royalcaledoniancurlingclub.org/nlstory.cfm?ID=37631&NLID=40830When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I just saw something on tv about co2 released vs co2 saved by fewer air flights. It seems to me that by now we could estimate both figures in a way that makes sense as a comparison. As in "the volcano released n tonnes of co2 during its eruption and fewer flights saved n tonnes of co2 over n days." Eruption days should include the complete eruption event. Kauaidan ( talk) 06:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Air travel disruption after the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption was copied or moved into Aftermath of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption with this edit on 07:55 17 April 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Recently a detailed list of UK ferries with increased passenger figures was added to this article. Shouldn't that rather go to the air travel disruptions article (if anywhere)? I would think that the focus on this article would be concrete disrupted events, not the transportation infrastructure itself. __ meco ( talk) 13:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I think we ought to change the name of this article for the reason given in the headline. __ meco ( talk) 13:14, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved (to include the month - discussion can continue as to whether it should be plural) Kotniski ( talk) 12:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Aftermath of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption →
Consequences of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption — Relisted 17:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC) Using the term aftermath is a misnomer. These are all consequences of an ongoing event. My suggestion is "Consequences on of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption". If others can think of better names still I have no objection to that. __
meco (
talk)
20:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Would not that be "during" the WWII? You could argue that Israel was created in the WWII aftermath, though. Ok, I think I see your point. Consequences does not have the "afterwards" implications aftermath does. However, I do not know if the difference is enough to make the change. Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Leirus Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
And then, if there are some changes in the policies about flying in this kind of conditions, we can make an "aftermath" section :) Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)Leirus Leirus ( talk) 10:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The arguments about hair loss and jews are rather lost on me I'm afraid. Returning to the debate about the name, the main candidates are "Aftermath of...", "Consequences of...." and "Effects of .....". If you type each of these terms into the search box on wikipedia to see the first few articles with these titles, you will notice that "consequences of" and "effects of" are mostly about things rather than events (e.g. "Consequences of special relativity"). The only one I could see that relates to a specific event was "effects of hurricane katrina". On the other hand, if you type in "aftermath of" they are all related to specific events. So based on the english definition and the way the phrase aftermath has been used before on wikipedia, the current title is more than adequate to describe the contents. There was an eruption on 14 April which resulted in a series of impacts in the aftermath of that event. There is a "current" tag on it to warn the reader that the events and consequences are ongoing so the reader cannot get confused and somehow believe that this is all in the dim and distant past. There are two objections above to the word aftermath and the reason given seems to be "I don't like the title". I think that a move proposal has to have a more concrete reason than just personal preference to change it. So again, I re-iterate my position as keep but welcome any further insight as to why Aftermath is a bad choice of word for the title of this article. ChrisUK ( talk) 20:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Change name I've changed my opinion after the merger discussion on the air travel disruption page. This article name needs to be in tune with that article as containing the indirect effects of the travel disruption. But I don't have a proposal though I'm afraid (and no, I don't think it should be "Indirect effects of the air travel disruption from ....." ChrisUK ( talk) 16:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Change name i believe that the the name needs changing but do not know what it should be changed to. NOTE: I added Cleanup-articletitle to the article and believe the merge tag should now be removed (but should possibly be added again in a month or so after the full extent of this event has finished). I have also stated this on the other article.
L blue l (
talk)
06:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree to a change. (Why has this discussion gone on longer than 7 days?) Airspace has again been closed in Ireland and Scotland in the last few days, and there is no indication that this will not occur again in the coming days and weeks. It's hard to think of an alternative title for this useful article, I think the best so far is Consequences of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruptions - note plural-- Lidos ( talk) 07:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC).
There should be more putang in the world he economic impact section. According to the news, the UK's groceries have been affected. Says that all groceries are flown into the UK... 70.29.208.247 ( talk) 09:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I recently placed a template on the cultural impacts section questioning whether all of the items listed there are important or relevant enough to be mention. This keeps being removed but I've replaced it because I fail to see how facts such as " Fark's Drew Curtis has been stranded in Armenia following a joint Fark/Reddit meetup" are important enough to be mentioned. Cordless Larry ( talk) 09:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It's not generally good to have an encyclopaedia with present tense statements like "is affecting". The accuracy of the article should be timeliness, and not dependent on re-editing in future to maintain its accuracy. Stephen B Streater ( talk) 06:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Every cloud has a silver lining. There doesn't seem to be much on benefits. Hotels with people staying longer, video conferencing companies, freelance volcanologists. I'll have a look round this evening, but it's worth a section I think. Stephen B Streater ( talk) 15:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Is there a list, or a need for a list of places evacuated in any Eyjafjallajökull eruption related articles? Apparently the village of Fljótshlíð (new article) was evacuated. Is this more suited for the 2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull article? Ideas? -- 220.101.28.25 ( talk) 03:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this is worth adding or not, but Reuters published Scenarios: What if volcano disruption lasts weeks, months? Jodi.a.schneider ( talk) 11:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe that there is a strong case for trimming and removing a considerable amount of the content relating to the impact on individuals, in line with WP:NOTNEWS#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information.
For example this, Aftermath_of_the_2010_Eyjafjallajökull_eruption#Comedy B6kull_eruption#Comedy. Can anyone justify per specific policy or guideline the inclusion of this and many of the other impacts on individuals? Just because they are notable individuals surely does not require the detailed recording of impacts on them in otherwise unrelated notable articles. Leaky Caldron 13:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I've put the UEFA Champions League back in front of the Japanese Grand Prix as I think it is a more notable event. Google hits for "Japanese Grand Prix" only returns about 136,000 hits [3], whereas "UEFA Champions League" returns about 11,700,000 [4]. -- JD554 ( talk) 10:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Scratch that, I've just realised the UEFA matches weren't rescheduled. I'm not sure the teams making alternative travel plans is particularly noteworthy, this must be something that happens reasonably regularly for all sorts of reasons. -- JD554 ( talk) 12:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Not exactly consensus above. Many seem to think some type of change is needed due to the ongoing nature of the event, but this is moot without a viable alternative which shows a cause-effect relationship without requiring the event to be complete, even implicitly.
How about "Consequences of the 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.156.225 ( talk) 15:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
There is a very noticeable change in central-European weather ongoing, that is attributed by many (mostly lay) people to this eruption.
In the land (Czech Republic, Central Europe, "downwind" from Iceland), where the "normal" weather pattern could be described as: "two of nine days raining, with 100 completelly Sunny days per year", there is now (whole May 2010, still continuing and predicted at least until middle of June) more than a month of almost continuous rainy and cloudy weather, repeated floods (a "hundred year water" coming twice in a month in some places). The "wet" clouds came from west-African tropics earlier in May and circled arround for some time (as can be seen on EumetSat images), but the "bad" weather normally dissipates much more quickly... Now the tropical "swirl" has gone, but the "bad" weather still continues...Will Forshaw is sexy.
(Semi, 83.208.147.243 ( talk) 23:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC))
putang Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa ( talk) 23:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:42, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:56, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Effects of the April 2010 Eyjafjallajökull eruption. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.royalcaledoniancurlingclub.org/nlstory.cfm?ID=37631&NLID=40830When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:38, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I just saw something on tv about co2 released vs co2 saved by fewer air flights. It seems to me that by now we could estimate both figures in a way that makes sense as a comparison. As in "the volcano released n tonnes of co2 during its eruption and fewer flights saved n tonnes of co2 over n days." Eruption days should include the complete eruption event. Kauaidan ( talk) 06:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)