User:Gailelliott/1999 Hector Mine earthquake
 | This is the sandbox page where you will draft your initial Wikipedia contribution.
If you're starting a new article, you can develop it here until it's ready to go live. If you're working on improvements to an existing article, copy only one section at a time of the article to this sandbox to work on, and be sure to use an edit summary linking to the article you copied from. Do not copy over the entire article. You can find additional instructions here. Remember to save your work regularly using the "Publish page" button. (It just means 'save'; it will still be in the sandbox.) You can add bold formatting to your additions to differentiate them from existing content. |
Article Evaluation
[edit]The lead section of the article 1999 Hector Mine earthquake seems to be much stronger with actual factual material than the rest of the article. The lead covers important information such as the magnitude, where it occurred, what kind of earthquake it was, etc… However, there are things that are never mentioned again like the Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base. The organization of the lead sets the article up to be messy and disorganized.
The article’s content is relevant to the topic, and it appears to be up to date. Information about what caused this earthquake is not present in the article; the author only mentions that twelve foreshocks occurred prior to the earthquake. The article, due to its focus on a natural event, does not address one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps or underrepresented populations or topics.
While the tone of the article seems to be fairly balanced, it does have awkward wordings of accounts. The wordings used in the article to describe the events makes it into an overall warped perspective.
Astonishingly, there isn’t a single parenthetical or in-text citation present in the article as it is now. The references section had to be referenced for source information as no citations were made in the text, but clicking through a few of the given references gives the impression that they are thorough. However, most of the sources are from databases and provide data on the earthquake; the author should have included more news-like sources to corroborate at least the damage section included in the article. There are no repeat authors for the references given although it is unclear whether or not the views of historically marginalized individuals are included. To reiterate, the author did well to include database-type sources but failed to include more eyewitness accounts.
This article is very poorly written and is sometimes even difficult to read due to certain grammar choices. The improper use of words was a common mistake that befell this article. This can be seen in the phrase “The combined force of the quake and train caused several rails to come loose and the train derailed.” This sentence and many others make the article very confusing for the reader to understand what is being said. There were some minor capitalization errors. The article had a good breakdown of sections but failed to deliver solid evidence for each one. Under the section named Earthquake, I would have expected more facts about the earthquake itself or of previous earthquakes that have plagued the same area. Instead, I was met with a poor eyewitness account that barely seemed credible and facts that felt like they did not belong at all. While the article was broken down into good sections, the sections were not at all filled out as they should be.
The article includes one image, a map of the state of California which shows the location of the epicenter and surrounding major cities. This image is not captioned and does not include a citation. Even the placement of the image could be improved, as the map image is not located near the section to which it is more relevant.
In the article’s talk page, the article’s author attempted to start a discussion by asking if earthquakes can occur at a .01km depth. They provide three links to earthquake databases to reference the ranges at which earthquakes occur including at .01 kilometers. However, all three of these links are either outdated or contain an error when clicked on, because they are hyperlinks. The only other thing in the article’s talk page is a mention of an edit of an external link by the author. The author is the only person who has written on the talk page. The article is not rated and is a part of the California and Earthquakes Wikipedia projects. The article is rated as start-class in California and stub-class in Earthquakes.
This article should be under the status of incomplete as the information seems to have holes and it is difficult to understand and follow. The article had its strengths when it was truly reporting only facts. This article would be greatly improved by taking the content through an editing source, such as Grammarly. It would also be improved upon by adding more important information that would truly inform future readers of the article. It is truly underdeveloped and is in need of editing and having more research done.
Article Draft
[edit]Lead
[edit]Due to the time and place at which the earthquake occured, there was little damage to the surrounding area as well as zero deaths.
Foreshocks
[edit]
During a fault rupture, stress is released as two sides of fault slip and move past each other. Stress can be transferred from one fault to adjacent faults, causing subsequent fault ruptures. By nature, foreshocks are not possible to identify as such until after the mainshock or largest magnitude of shaking occurs. For this reason, they can not be used to predict larger earthquakes or give warnings to residents of the affected area. That being said, it was determined after the fact that a sequence of twelve foreshocks preceded the Hector Mine mainshock. These foreshocks moved northward, began 20 hours before the Hector Mine 'main event,' and occurred in the same location as a cluster of off-fault aftershocks of the Landers quake of 1992.[1] The largest of the twelve foreshocks had a magnitude of 3.8 and occurred at 7:41 PM PDT on the 15th of October. [2]
Earthquake
[edit]Hector Mine Earthquake was a magnitude 7.1 earthquake and one of strongest earthquakes to occur during the last 100 years.[3] The name comes from a nearby quarry located in the Mojave Desert, California.[1] For being one of the largest magnitude earthquakes, it didn’t cause nearly as much damage compared to the 6.7 Northridge earthquake.[4]
Within the last two months, the Hector Mine Earthquake is one of four earthquakes recorded with a of magnitude 7 or greater. Hector Mine Earthquake was a magnitude 7.1 earthquake and one of strongest earthquakes to occur during the last 100 years. The name comes from a nearby quarry located in the Mojave Desert, California. For being one of the largest magnitude earthquakes, it did not cause nearly as much damage compared to the lesser magnitude 6.7 Northridge earthquake, which was in the same area 5 years before. The earthquake's felt area included the majority of Southern California as well as parts of Arizona and Nevada— including Las Vegas. The earthquake awakened many people in Las Vegas with residents reporting dizziness and having trouble walking. The shaking from this seism was felt as far north as Carson City, Nevada.
The earthquake had a moment magnitude of 7.1 and a maximum Mercalli intensity of VII (Very strong). The strike-slip earthquake occurred in a remote part of the Mojave Desert, 47 miles (76 km) east-southeast of Barstow, California, inside the Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base. Its name comes from a nearby quarry named Hector Mine, which is located 22 kilometers (14 mi) northwest of the epicenter. Strike-slip faults are fractures where the blocks have mostly moved horizontally. If the block opposite of an observer looking across the fault moves to the right, the slip style is termed right lateral; if the block moves to the left, the motion is termed left lateral. This strike-slip was a right-lateral involving the Lavic Lake fault and the Bullion Fault.
Damage
[edit]Despite the high magnitude of the earthquake, damage to the area was limited due to the affected region being mostly desert. While the earthquake was primarily in the desert, movement could be felt through many parts of California, including Palm Springs.[3] Also associated with this earthquake was a surface rupture. The Twentynine Palms Marine Corp Base, located in the Mojave Desert, contained the surface rupture of the Hector Mine earthquake. This did not cause extensive damage to the base. The biggest report of damage was a derailed Amtrak train which left rails split up and a total of twenty-one cars completely off. There were no deaths caused by the derailment and only some were treated for mild injuries.[4] Two California highway bridges were also damaged due to the Hector Mine Earthquake.[4]
Aftermath
[edit]The 1999 Hector Mine earthquake resulted in segments of aftershocks in the nearby area. The most notable of them, due to their large magnitudes, occurred several kilometers both north and south to the main shock. These aftershocks were measured to be a 5.9 and 5.7 in magnitude.[5] The earthquake and its aftershocks resulted in surface deformation of several millimeters vertically and horizontally on many of the surrounding pre-existing faults in the area.[6]
1992 Landers Earthquake
[edit]In 1992, prior to the Hector Mine Earthquake, another earthquake occurred in California called the Landers Earthquake. This earthquake was a magnitude 7.3 and, similarly to the Hector Mine quake, was also a strike slip event. [7] This event is likely to have triggered the Hector Mine Earthquake as it only occurred 20 kilometers away from the earthquake that happened seven years later.[8] The Hector Mine Earthquake is thought to be an example of increased fault stress from a separate quake which built over seven years until finally rupturing in 1999.[7] As a result, studying of the Landers Earthquake became quite important in understanding this new earthquake near the turn of the century.
Article body
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b "SCEDC – Hector Mine Earthquake". Archived from the original on 2012-05-23. Retrieved 2012-03-21.
- ^ "Southern California Earthquake Data Center at Caltech". scedc.caltech.edu. Retrieved 2021-10-15.
- ^ a b "20 Years Since the 7.1 Hector Mine Earthquake Rattled the Coachella Valley". NBC Palm Springs - News, Weather, Traffic, Breaking News. 2019-10-17. Retrieved 2021-10-15.
- ^ a b c Facebook; Twitter; options, Show more sharing; Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Email; URLCopied!, Copy Link; Print (1999-10-17). "7.0 Earthquake in Mojave Desert Rocks Southland". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 2021-10-15.
{{cite web}}:|last=has generic name (help) - ^ Hauksson, Egill; Jones, Lucile M.; Hutton, Kate (2002-05-01). "The 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake Sequence: Complex Conjugate Strike-Slip Faulting". Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 92 (4): 1154–1170. doi:10.1785/0120000920. ISSN 0037-1106.
- ^ Fialko, Yuri; Sandwell, David; Agnew, Duncan; Simons, Mark; Shearer, Peter; Minster, Bernard (2002-09-13). "Deformation on Nearby Faults Induced by the 1999 Hector Mine Earthquake". Science. 297 (5588): 1858–1862. doi:10.1126/science.1074671.
- ^ a b Pollitz, Fred; Sacks, Selwyn (May 1, 2002). "Stress Triggering of the 1999 Hector Mine Earthquake by Transient Deformation Following the 1992 Landers Earthquake". Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Retrieved November 29, 2021.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ Felzer, Karen R.; Becker, Thorsten W.; Abercrombie, Rachel E.; Ekström, Göran; Rice, James R. (2002). "Triggering of the 1999 MW 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake by aftershocks of the 1992 MW 7.3 Landers earthquake". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 107 (B9): ESE 6–1–ESE 6-13. doi:10.1029/2001JB000911. ISSN 2156-2202.
Peer Review
[edit]Everything in the article is very relevant to the article topic, and is an addition to what the article already had. Nothing is a distractor in the article and seems to all be solid information. The article is neutral and you did a good job at keeping your opinion out of it. None of the claims are biased and don't take a particular position. All viewpoints are evenly represented, I like how you are adding to each of the sections that were already there. All of the citations are being used well, and you are doing good job at getting information from a range of sources. All of the links work, and the sources are being use to support the claims in the article. All the sources they are using are neutral, and don't seem to be opinionated at all. All information is to date. I would continue to add to your article and find more information to add to each of the sections, but this is a great start!! Draft so far has made good edits to the run-on sentences of the pre-existing article, making it easier to understand with addition of more information. It may be beneficial to add more specific information about the "many pre-existing faults in the region." Specifically where they are located and what they are. Or add a link to an article about faults for readers who may not know what they are.