Talk:Death toll from tsunami in Southeast Asia increases

Review of revision 889731 [Passed]

Revision 889731 of this article has been reviewed by Juliancolton (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I am not too keen on having so many articles copy and pasted from VOA News but that's another discussion. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 889731 of this article has been reviewed by Juliancolton (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I am not too keen on having so many articles copy and pasted from VOA News but that's another discussion. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

April 2018

{{edit protected}} Could we move the article from Death toll from tsunami in Southeast Asia increases to match this talkpage. The article does not mention Southeast Asia and it is a little disjointed having the article under one name and the review under a different name. Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 14:16, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Green Giant: I certainly agree the headline is bad. It looks as if the user who renamed the talk page meant to rename the article, and it would have been okay to do so at the time; but, renaming the talk page instead of the article is a mistake the wiki platform fails to warn about either before or after the fact afaik, an unfortunate misdesign that appears to have foiled the user's intent. And now it's been, well, somewhat more than 24 hours since publication. A really semantically significant rename at this point would be against the principle of the archive. So if we feel it's bad enough (I want to take a moment to think about this, since it's not like the problem hasn't already been in place for a while), the thing we'd do is issue a {{correction}}. --Pi zero (talk) 15:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Cheers for reuniting the two pages. A correction would be fine I think. It is debatable about where the South Pacific region ends and Southeast Asia begins but the countries mentioned are clearly not SE Asia. Green Giant (talk) 15:24, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Is this issue resolved? --SVTCobra 14:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: I've drafted a correction (after studying some of the sources). --Pi zero (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Sighted. --SVTCobra 16:59, 8 May 2018 (UTC)