Talk:Crandall Canyon Mine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Utah Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Utah, a WikiProject dedicated to articles related to the U.S. state of Utah.
To participate: join (or just read up) at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
WikiProject Energy
Energy Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low importance within energy.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
To-do list for Crandall Canyon Mine: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Expand disaster response section.
  • Include specific information on removal of debris to reach the actual miners in person.
  • Expand the timeline to include both collapse incidents.

Contents

[edit] Merge

Lower case "m" in mine, or upper case "M" in Mine?

FYI: I looked at other mines on Wikipedia, and a rough eyeball guess is 60% UPPER and 40% LOWER. IP4240207xx 05:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I've been discussing this on my talk page. I think this article should be here not @ mine (lowercase), since it seems to be referred to as a proper noun rather than Crandall Canyon's mine. Any ideas on the subject? ._-zro tc 05:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
All caps is fine with me.--AveryG 18:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Upper case, because the full name of this is Crandall Canyon Mine, not just Crandall Canyon 70.58.32.118 02:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

I just found a page with a whole bunch of stats on tonnage, etc. I will make a table shortly to display them.--AveryG 18:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earthquake Details

From the USGS 199.172.246.196 16:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bob Murray

I believe this article should have more content regarding CEO Bob Murray, who has become quite notable in American media with the way he has reacted to the accident, such as insisting it was an earthquake when scientists didn't feel it was, defending against accusations of retreat mining, etc. Note, however, that any wikilinks would need to be disambiguated as there is already another Bob Murray with an article, unconnected to this individual. 68.146.47.196 13:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, you can make a note about Mr. Murray v. the U of Utah, but this article is about a "mine," not a person. But. Mr. Murray needs his own article, his testimony before Congress, his attacks on Al Gore and lip service corporations, those things should be in there. IP4240207xx 15:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violation

State publications, such as the text of the History and Statistics section, are not public domain. --Michael WhiteT·C 14:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I intend to redo that section and use the Utah state page as a reference, but not today, I have my kimo appointment. Maybe tomorrow? IP4240207xx 15:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I rewrote the section and used that page as a reference. Chupper 20:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Time

I see all times are given in Mountain Standard Time, MST. Are they not on Daylight Time in that county? 4.249.186.134 01:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

All of Utah uses Mountain Daylight Time, MDT, in season. Douglas Barber 22:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References/'Retreat Mining'

I see everyone is referencing news articles. Most of these can hardly be considered reliable sources. I see little if any factual information, in particular the use of 'retreat mining' which seems to be the media's made up mining method for this incident. Retreat mining is done at almost any underground coal operation, that are retreating from a long wall you don't have to maintain entry's to the long wall face so you pull those pillars on retreat. I will start to update this article as I have time.

Djoeyd114 13:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

On a second note I updated the section on 'retreat mining' and deleted the reference. The AP is hardly a credible source, especially when it comes to mining methods. Djoeyd114 14:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

This article should be about the "MINE," it should not be an article on "Retreat mining," that should be in the "Retreat Mining" article. This article should stick to the facts. If it “is” a fact that the collapse occurred because of "Retreat Mining", then it would be a fact, and should be put in this article. If it is a fact that some knowledgeable people believe "Retreat Mining" is a reason for the collapse, and some knowledgeable people believe that it did not, then put in a small paragraph stating both sides, citing who these "experts" are, equal time for both sides, and a link to the "Retreat Mining" article, where it goes into depth as to what "Retreat Mining" is. This is an encyclopedia and there is no room for the editors to editorialize. Just report the facts. Thank you, and happy editing. IP4240207xx 15:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


I agree this article should be about the mine, I will be patrolling to make sure it is neutral. I am merely stating that citing the AP is not a valid reference. The AP is not an expert on the subject. I report only the facts, thank you. Djoeyd114 14:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
The AP is actually an extremely valid reference for Wikipedia purposes. Wikipedia editors are not allowed to do their own original research, so we can only rely on published, reliable sources, in many cases news sources. Whether those sources are actually factual or not is their problem and not Wikipedia's. That's one of Wikipedia's most important editing policies and it's important to understand it before editing.--Gloriamarie 05:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I understand that Gloria, I am merely combating mis-information. I would think that its important to understand that it’s the editors job to identify incorrect information and fix it. People too often blindly ref the AP, these people are reporters. Meanwhile there are countless documents sitting online written by professionals in the industry that are not diluted and misinterpreted. When it comes to technical issues that accurate information is what should referenced, now when it comes to updates such as drilling progress, etc. sure the AP is fine. All I am saying is too many people blindly follow what is reported as the truth, where if they would spend a little extra time researching they would produce a better quality article. Cheers Djoeyd114 15:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

There are various types of "professionals in the industry", aka "experts". You have experts who are employed exclusively by mine owners, experts who are employed exclusively by the United Mine Workers of America, experts who are lawyers who typically sue in behalf of miners or their families, and probably other flavors of experts. I know of no class of "professionals in the industry" who have no professional interest in bending the truth one way or another, unless it be inspectors for the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration. Douglas Barber 22:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

And you have the press that bend the truth, either in order to assign blame or because they don't understand what the experts are telling them... I am qualified to make edits on this (I'm a mining engineer) and I have nothing to do with the coal industry. Thank you for contributing to the discussion. Djoeyd114 15:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Safety Concerns

One of the items that I feel should be added to this page which is included on the Robert E. Murray page comes from that page's "Political Activity" section.

But I am not sure how to copy it over without ruining/losing the citations.

Here is the code:

In the wake of 2006's [[Sago Mine disaster]], lawmakers in [[West Virginia]] and [[Ohio]] proposed legislation requiring mine workers to wear emergency tracking devices. Murray lobbied against the laws, calling them "extremely misguided."<ref name=goldman/> He said that politicians were rushing to pass laws and thus "playing politics with the safety of my employees." He said that rather than create "knee-jerk" state laws after the disaster, such as in the case of West Virginia, which passed the law in less than one day after it was proposed, the federal government should host a panel which would study the industry and make recommendations for safety measures.<ref name="craincleveland"/> He claimed that the federal government should be involved for uniform standards and because tension between unions and companies created difficulty in reaching private agreement on safety standards. Murray maintained that the personal tracking devices to be mandated in the state laws, called PEDs, did not work under certain common mining conditions (such as below 600 feet in depth), and better devices needed to be developed in order to effectively guard miners in case of accident. He said, "The will is there. Unfortunately, the technology isn't."<ref name="craincleveland"/>

Can anyone take a stab at moving it over, please?--AveryG 04:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This article is about the Crandall Canyon Mine, how about just a sentence referencing the "safety issue" and "Robert Murray"...???? IP4240207xx 05:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, perhaps something about how he testified against the WV and Ohio state legislations requiring PEDs.--AveryG 05:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
If it's mentioned, it needs to be noted that the miners were 1200 feet down, so according to what Murray said above, below 600 feet the devices don't work, and they wouldn't have helped in this case.--Gloriamarie 16:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes! I direct quote from Mr. Murray would work perfectly.--AveryG 19:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deafness?

I don't see any discussion in the media reports about whether the trapped miners are able to hear. Given that some of the reports suggested that the workers could have been killed by waves of air pressure, it seems possible that survivors could have suffered severe damage to their eardrums and hearing. Are the rescue efforts taking this into account as they look for miners from the boreholes, such as by dropping lights or odor signals for the miners to find? Mike Serfas 16:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Good question Mike, I would email (or call) some of the press people and the MHSA, and asked them that quesiton. IP4240207xx 17:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline of the latest Accident

I will be trying to make a timeline of the latest accident. JoeyLovesSports 04:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Is there a possibility that the whole mine collapse and this recent development will be formed into one seperate article? 71.213.95.158 05:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I would agree with you but I think it would need a Wikipedia Community vote. But, thank you for asking! JoeyLovesSports 05:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mine to be abandoned

Murray has indicated that he wishes to abandon the Crandall Canyon Mine. I've added a reference to the KUTV article with his comment, but it would be good to have more information on the future of the mine, if someone knows anything about it. 166.70.233.89 16:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stuff Removed from Safety Section

After rereading the "Safety Concerns" section, I removed some portions that didn't make sense.

First there was an editorial comment added to the number of violations at the mine, that was not in the reference that was cited as the source of the comment!

Secondly, I removed a comment about how much coal was removed using the longwall method. This comment had no citation.--AveryG 22:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I restored the assertion that the violations were similar in number to similar-sized mines, along with a reference. Thanks for pointing it out. It was not an editorial comment, but just hadn't been sourced yet. For things of that nature, you can add a fact tag which will allow others to insert citations at a later time if you can't find one.--Gloriamarie 03:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)