Talk:Humanitarian crisis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Thanks for the cleaning up etc. I am not sure how the "explosive" howler crept in. I am, however, a little puzzled at the rearrangement of the category section. It makes more sense to me to lead with statement of how concrete experience affects categorization, and put the pandemic sentence as a subpara since it is an example re: the health community. It still seems a bit peculiar to have that in the lead paragraph of the category section as it is not really a typical humanitarian crisis.

I have put in the full name of the IFRC since the link directs to Movement site and it is then clearer to new arrivals at that site that it is not a list of the Movement but of the IFRC, a part of the movement.

I quickly edited this article to expand the examples of humanitarian crises. I may add more later when I have time.

I toyed with putting in footnotes--it does look neater, but since the list mentioned in footnote 1 is two links away if footnoted and only one if the link was in the text I left it imbedded. In my mind I tend to use the footnotes as a reference for somebody who wants to know where that idea comes from, (i.e. justifies the statement) most readers probably don't, and the imbedded link for something which expands or clarifies. But I am afraid that this is my inner style sheet and I guess that I should take the time to learn the standard one.

Joel Mc 07:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for further spelling out the abbreviations used. I understand your comment about the "rearrangement of the category section". I had considered that the lead in to the category section was a bit "weak", so I reorganised slightly. Rereading it afresh however, I recognise that it interupts the scan a bit. I'll take a second stab. Cheers. Guliolopez 12:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)