Talk:Incidents during the Hajj

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Needs a title[edit]

This is a major tragedy deserving its own article, no need to redirect to a general article about the stoning ritual. 24.63.125.78 18:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The current article structure has redundant information in each one. I would suggest moving this to Incidents during the Hajj (or Incidents during the stoning of the devil) and merging in the details from Hajj (and stoning of the devil) violet/riga (t) 19:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is a tragedy, but it does not warrant its own article. Why don't we have articles on every tragic accident that occurs during the Hajj? We don't have one for the 2004 incident, nor the 2001 incident. I would however say keep this article as it is now and then once it dies down as a current event, redirect it and merge to the appropriate section in Hajj. Pepsidrinka 20:03, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Pepsidrinka. The 1990 incident claimed over 1400 lives, but does not have its own article. I've put mergeto templates on the article, and I think that maybe once the death toll stops going up and it fades from news, we should merge it with one of the other articles covering Hajj incidents. Neldo 20:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The details here are as relevant to Hajj as they are to stoning of the devil. I believe that all the incidents should be noted in a separate article, especially if this one grows. I have removed the dfgBhOCITY3;NPIW;LDMrGXTFJN8OCLI23LHUQOLI9KMZm9p7cpage. violet/riga (t) 20:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've done this now - I hope people agree that it's much better now. violet/riga (t) 20:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just an aside, but I was thinking about this last night (ironically). Why is it that we have major articles on terrorist attacks or on air crashes, but we don't have similar quality work on stampedes or riots around the world, that can claim many more lives? Wikipedia prides itself on having a global perspective and I believe this stampede is of much more importance to those in Saudi Arabia than the London subway bombings or Hurricane Rita. I really hope we can create individual articles for all the stampedes at the Hajj as well as other major stampedes that may have happened worldwide, such as at sporting events, religious events, or those motivated out of fear (such as the one in Baghdad in 2005). BlueGoose 20:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Counting the revision before information starting being merged, there was only six sentences in the article that pertained to the current incident. And two of them mentioned the hotel incident of a week ago. Every single incident involving the hajj, or atleast those involving the stoning of the walls will include the exact same information; it is not neccessary to have 40 different pages for 40 different incidents, if the only distinguishing features would be the date, the number dead and the number wounded. I would agree with your point regarding riots though, as riots are alot more dynamic than these incidents during the hajj. Pepsidrinka 20:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think each one could be expanded enough to warrant its own article, given the lack of details about them and due to the similarity between many of them. I'd love to be proven wrong though, as the deaths of so many is certainly notable. violet/riga (t) 20:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my initial argument, that the January 12, 2006 tregedy deserves its own article. Certainly in sheers numbers, it surpassed the causalties of most of the terrorist bombings that were featured as individual Wikipedia news articles during the past year. While you are correct in noting that most of the information was initially duplicated from other articles, that's why it was a stub. As more details become available, more contributors can edit new "dynamic" information into the article. By merging it you are crippling this process and in effect perpetuating the apparent similarity of all the hajj tragedies. 24.63.125.78 21:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has its own section which can continue to be expanded. If that section grows enough to deserve separating then that's great. Until then it is best off here. violet/riga (t) 21:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who originally redirected this article to Stoning of the Devil when it was called 2006 Hajj stampede, but I think the current setup where this article is called Incidents during the Hajj and contains all the stampede information is fine. Although it could be called something more helpful than "Incidents during the Hajj". And to 24.63.125.78, "rvv" means vandalism was reverted, just say "rv" to revert elsewise. silsor 21:48, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I very much appreciated the context that this article provides, which an independent article wouldn't have given me. MattShepherd 22:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Why is it that we have major articles on terrorist attacks or on air crashes, but we don't have similar quality work on stampedes or riots around the world, that can claim many more lives?" Because those are serious events. This is a bunch of idiots who manage to kill themselves every year. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.30.183.157 (talk • contribs) .

Why is it that for every 99 people who want to actually use this project to create an encyclopedia, we have one person to use this project as their soapbox and add nothing productive to the conversation? Pepsidrinka 00:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See Law of large numbers -- Maverick 04:55, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

66.30.183.157's attitude demonstrates to me why the latest stampede deserves its own article. "Idiots" routinely "manage to get themselves killed" at European soccer matches, yet each incident is a newsworthy tragedy. As to why the far-worse 1990 tragedy does not have its own article, for one Wikipedia was not around then, and I suspect the general interest among English-speaking contributors is not enough to initiate an article on this now-historical event. Neither is a good reason. So my $0.02 reamains to dedicate 2006 Hajj stampede to the subject. Barring that, I would propose that the present article (Incidents during the Hajj) be renamed to something less benign: "Tragedies during the Hajj" or at least "Fatal incidents during the Hajj." 24.63.125.78 16:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with maintaining a separate article and renaming this one to something like the above suggestions.--Cam 20:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Two paragraphs plus one sentence hardly merits a separate article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.143.37.76 (talk • contribs) .
  • I would say it's unwise to suggest each stampede incident needs its own article on the basis that the London underground bombings has its own. There were perpetrators, investigations etc specific to the bombings that don't hold true for events at the Hajj, the causes of which, whilst tragic, are much simpler; too many people in too confined a space. As such, there will be great similarities between Hajj stampedes not present in individual terrorist acts taking place in disparate locations in different countries. I'm not saying, however, that there are NO reasons why each stampede should not have its own article; simply that that one reason seems flawed. --bodnotbod 01:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Death does not mean an "Incident"[edit]

If 2 million people visit an event for 4 weeks, then you expect that some of them will die. As a rough calculation, given an average life expectancy of 80 (which is very high) and an unbiased sample of the population, we would expect 2000000 people * 4 weeks / (52 weeks/year * 80 years) = 2000 people every Hajj. On this basis, I removed the section on deaths during the 2007 Hajj, as none of referenced articles mentioned any particular incident. Indeed, all the linked articles referred to most people dying from old age, heart attacks, etc. (Joelphillips (talk) 21:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

That's not how life expectancy works - life expectancy is the mean number of years to live at birth, so assuming a normal distribution, you would have to divide a person's chances of dying per month by 2 in this calculation. But the average life expectancy of a population of children, adults, etc. is also greater than the life expectancy at birth of the same population, since everyone who is alive at a certain age has avoided all causes of death before them (especially infant mortality).
The better way to look at this is just to use an average crude mortality rate - which is 8.3 per 1000 for the entire world. Assuming the population at the hajj represents the same distribution as the world, then 0.0083/12 * 2,000,000 = 1387 people are "supposed" to die during the month. The book The Unthinkable: Who Survives Disasters and Why (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0307352897/ref=oss_T15_product) has a good accounting of Hajj incidents, and talks about how the bad conditions during that month in the city also cause a lot more deaths by disease than what is natural (page 159). For example, 2.8 out of 1000 Indonesian pilgrims died one year during Hajj from pneumonia and other diseases, which is 25 deaths per 1000 for a yearly rate, much higher than the natural crude death rate.
Of course, these stampedes are unnatural mass-death events that cause more deaths above the natural death rate. So they are still notable events, comparable to aircraft crashes or natural disasters. When I finish the book I mentioned I may try to improve this article. Some comments/suggestions would motivate me to do it more!

Wilytilt (talk) 01:22, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Repetitions[edit]

This article contains several repetitions (e.g. of the 2006 hostel collapse) which ought to be cleaned up. Ben Finn 23:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's been sorted now. violet/riga (t) 23:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sectioning[edit]

I'm wondering if the article should be ordered by date rather than the type of incident... violet/riga (t) 23:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, that would make more sense looking at objectively. However, considering that if someone were to come to this article and learn about one of the stampede accidents, they would probably be more inclined to care about the other related incidents in other years, as opposed to having to read through the lines to figure out when the other similar events occurred. Pepsidrinka 00:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. BlueGoose 01:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

November 1979 Masjid al-Haram takeover[edit]

It looks like the November 1979 violence took place after the Hajj had been over for some weeks (it was at the beginning of the month of Muharram). There is a connection with pilgrimage to Mecca, yes, but it did not occur "during the Hajj". --Cam 07:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"fatal tragedy of the Islamic month of Dhu al-Hijjah in 2006"[edit]

Well, if it didn't, then it really would not be be an "Incidents during the Hajj", would it?--67.173.142.168 07:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The big fire[edit]

I'm surprised to find no mention of the massive fire in 1997. This was much more significant an incident than most of those listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.171.124 (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits and Minor Reorganization[edit]

I made editorial changes to the article on 7/24/2010. A few of the incidents reported were under the wrong headings, there were redundancies and other inconsistencies that I have fixed. I am not sure that the lists are complete, especially about the fires. Also the "disease" section only reflects recent decades of history. In past decades other diseases, such as Cholera, were a major threat. This article can be improved substantially by knowledgeable people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.202.151 (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Incidents during the Hajj[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Incidents during the Hajj's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "mgmpPRC":

  • From Shia Islam: Miller, Tracy, ed. (2009). Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population (PDF). Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2009-10-08. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  • From Kuwait: Miller, Tracy, ed. (October 7, 2009). "Mapping the Global Muslim Population: (Only local national citizens are called Kuwaitis and individuals awarded the nationality.) A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 8 October 2009. Approximate Percentage of Muslim Population that is Shia: 20 – 25
  • From Muslim: Miller, Tracy, ed. (2009). Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Muslim Population (PDF). Pew Research Center. pp. 8–9, 17–19. Retrieved 2009-10-08. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 14:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the percentage of Muslims from the lead because many anit-Islam freaks will come to mess around with it.--NorthernPashtun (talk) 16:03, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1997 fire[edit]

I know this will only be classed as hearsay as I do not have evidence but a muslim I worked with was at the Hajj in 1997 and said there were about 1500 deaths due to the fires (no idea how many injured). They hushed up the real total as it's bad publicity. (178.236.117.122 (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Shi'ite reports[edit]

Have added the 3 widely publicised RS reports on Salafi threats and violence against American Shi'ite pilgrims from last year, and in so doing removed the 'out of date label', there's more that could be added.Cpsoper (talk) 13:25, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about Saudia Flight 163?[edit]

It was a hajj flight, packed with pilgrims headed for Jeddah. Due to the (officially) inexplicable behavior of its captain it killed all 287 passengers and 14 crew. Yes, the investigation (officially) could not determine the source of the blaze, but it did uncover propane stoves used by the pilgrims to make tea at the back of the plane where the fire began (if I may say, "Duh." I've spent more than twenty-five years reading final, official aviation accident reports from all over the world and the truth is not always in the best interests of the parties involved, so it occasionally - if not blatantly - escapes publication). And yes, the actual deaths took place at the originating airport, but the article already discusses deaths worldwide related to the hajj. It very much seems this preventable disaster should also be listed among notable tragedies, regardless of the (officially) unanswerable questions. (Not an editor. Just a reader grateful for the editors' hard work.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.248.51.75 (talk) 00:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stampede 2015 AP report[edit]

I have added details of AP's report on understated fatalities.[1] Cpsoper (talk) 09:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Incidents during the Hajj. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Incidents during the Hajj. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Incidents during the Hajj. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New incidents[edit]

Has there been any significant fatal incidents after 2015 during Hajj?88.114.196.82 (talk) 09:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Incidents_during_the_Hajj&oldid=1217368992"