Talk:Humanitarian response to the 2010 Haiti earthquake

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Caribbean: Haiti This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Haiti. Disaster management This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. International relations This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:Hidden infoboxes

Take a look at how well-developed the Reactions to the 2008 Mumbai attacks article is. It could really serve as a good model for the structuring of this article.  Burningview  ✉ 22:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start. People are turning this into a nationalist pissing match. Photos of vessels from Mexico, or airplanes in Brazil are completely irrelevant. All this needs is the exact relief supplies and/or amount of money and personnel being sent by each country. What will people do next, place photos of food pallets in Britain or relief workers waving from an airstrip in Spain? Rafajs77 (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's no surprise at all to me that an American said that. NorthernThunder (talk) 01:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, check out Humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. Cmcnicoll (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Between the two proposed models: Reactions to the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and Humanitarian response to the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, I think the first (on the Mumbai attacks) is best. The format is much more user-friendly, and the article here already resembles it more. On an update on photos: Someone had posted another photo of Brazilian aid workers but now IN Haiti, I have no objections to images being added of the humanitarian work taking place. I had a problem with images of naval vessels, etc. outside the context of Haiti. However, someone deleted that image, and probably with good reason...ostensibly this simple article could be overrun by such images, and how would we OBJECTIVELY choose which to delete? Since that image was removed, I will go ahead and remove the one of the U.S. ships off the coast of Haiti, and will continue to delete such images unless different editors reach a consensus about adding images. As it stands many edits are being carried out by unregistered users (just leaving IP addresses) and I worry about people using this article, as I stated earlier, as a way to convey national pride or prestige which is not only inappropriate, but unhelpful for those seeking information on the international response. Rafajs77 (talk) 08:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a WP to back that up, but any images of one particular country helping would seem inappropriate to me. All, which would obviously get out of hand, or none in this case. If an image was allowed it should be 1 per country/company, and as a sidebar pic which would mangle the sections w/o careful editing. Booster4324 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Booster, I think you're right. Perhaps one image of the U.N. at work at the top of the article would be sufficient. Anything else is not just problematic for the reasons I have already stated, but also for the reason you state...it is a busy article and images throw off the formatting too much. Rafajs77 (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sorry this is the worst rationale I have ever read. Guess what if you have pics of 3 diff. national responses (US, Mex, Brazil) then sorry its called ROUGH CONSENSUS and not some problem to be dealt with. You guys sound too far gone to understand this, but if this article is going to have any good pics, the US or Brazil gov't both allow open distribution of their work- so go try and find a bunch of high res free-rights pics from Haiti, that aren't taken by a gov't. If you don't like the pics I am finding then REPLACE them with something else, but sorry kids its unencyclopedic to delete response images, from the response page (duh) 66.220.124.56 (talk) 09:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're joining the conversation quite late, and have assumed that it is a confrontation...it isn't. If you had read the above thoroughly you would have noted that I asked for consensus. If you had read the above thoroughly you would have also noted that I thought it appropriate to add images of the rescue efforts. The problem wasn't with just any old image, it was people adding images of their countries's ships and rescue teams. If we wanted to see pictures of U.S. coast guard cutters, for example, we could visit the page on the U.S. coast guard. I have no problems with the image you've added so far. Rafajs77 (talk) 10:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating "The Queen of ... issued a personal statement" for all of these Realm nations is inappropriate. The same thing is repeated again and again for Belize, Barbados, Canada, etc. Grsz¹¹ 02:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could say The Queen of the Commonwealth and add it to the International organizations section, beside the EU and the UN... 76.66.197.17 (talk) 14:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed all the mentions of it; it was my second failed attempt at finding a way to mention her donation and statement without inherent British POV bias. I did think about the international organisations section; but, is Queen Elizabeth II really an organisation? --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 19:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Commonwealth is an international organization, and the Queen is the titular head of the Commonwealth.  Commonwealth - even has a flag. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 05:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Currently it states "Two United States Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft also arrived January 13 with emergency supplies, medical units and special tactics teams." However these articles suggest that 4 arrived.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123185581 (2 AF)

http://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/786/452059/ (2 CG)

2 CG and 2 AF. Am I wrong? Booster4324 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I will wait till tomorrow, but otherwise I am going to change it to 4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.65.150.32 (talk) 01:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 76ers player Sammie Dalambert donated $100,000 to the fund. The Philadelphia Eagles owner donated $50,000 to the fund.

Source various local news outlets.--Cooly123 14:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

The article is excessively long in its length, so I recommend splitting the article into the following:

• Response by governments to the 2010 Haiti earthquake
• Response by non-governmental organizations to the 2010 Haiti earthquake
• Response by companies and corporations to the 2010 Haiti earthquake
• Religious response to the 2010 Haiti earthquake (to contain reactions like Pat Robertson's)

I think it will be a pretty cut-and-dry approach towards discussing the various sectors' responses without using an excessively-long article like this current version. --Toussaint (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have aleady created Humanitarian_response_by_national_governments_to_the_2010_Haiti_earthquake - I like it. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as if someone has taken upon themselves to remove the citations I added for everything I added to the Canadian section. Sincerely, thank you to this person for removing the important work I have done. You have served the Wiki community well. NorthernThunder (talk) 17:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please elaborate? Which citations have been removed - can you provide an example for those of us who are clueless. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the washington redskins are donating san snyders private jet to be filled with medical supplies

http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Redskins_Join_Haiti_Disaster_Relief_Efforts_100907.jsp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.219.235.6 (talk) 00:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just started this article which needs expanding: Hope for Haiti. Thanks. 03md 14:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a bunch of uncited claims rather than tagging them with "citation needed" templates. Otherwise this article will liable to people adding in their own unsubstantiated claims which will go undetected. --Pontificalibus (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Humanitarian_response_by_national_governments_to_the_2010_Haiti_earthquake#.C2.A0France has a big hole near the beginning (missing paragraphs referred to by preceding one), and has no mention of yesterday's French complaint about having to respect American air-traffic control nor of what could (from a brief account) be described as Bernard Kouchner's rebuke of his own government for making that complaint. Is there an edit war involved?
--Jerzy•t 20:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed unreferenced paragraphs, possibly copy and pasted from elsewhere. --Pontificalibus (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]