Talk:Bhopal disaster
|
|
Is this title really the best possible? Two reasons: it is not a tragedy in the classic sense of the term, but only in the popular (mis)conception of the meaning and it does promote a POV. There are those who might not characterize this as a tragedy, and since it's not really accurate anyway, I think it should be moved to Bhopal disaster or something. Unless it really is what the incident is frequently referred to as, which I don't think is true. Tokerboy 01:06 Nov 7, 2002 (UTC)
- "Bhopal Disaster" would probably be better, though I think the above complaint comes about 30 years too late. For better or worse, "tragedy" now means "sad event" to most people. Tempshill 18:37, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- Nice work you're doing on this article, Tempshill. While you're at it, I think you should definitely move it across to Bhopal Disaster (7600 hits on Google) from Bhopal Tragedy (only 2600). Just in case you needed a push... –Hjr 19:16, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- Agrees. Wherever the blame lies, it is no doubt an industrial disaster, and should be categorised as such. chance 04:30, Dec 5, 2003 (UTC)
- "Be bold", they said. So I was. Page moved. –User:Hajor 04:48, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
| Contents |
Accident/Act of sabotage
Wiki/BBC say Bhopal was an accident but the Union Carbide website says it was an act of sabotage. Which is true?
Hmmm, who am I more incline to believe? The giant corporation who has a huge stake in disclaiming responsibility or a reputable independent news organization? Funkyj 20:04, 2004 Dec 2 (UTC)
- DOW has now accepted responsibility, according to Reuters (http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6987580). -Wikibob | Talk 11:14, 2004 Dec 3 (UTC)
- No. In a bulletin less than an hour later: [[1] (http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=6988143)]
- TroelsArvin 12:01, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- DOW has now accepted responsibility, according to Reuters (http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6987580). -Wikibob | Talk 11:14, 2004 Dec 3 (UTC)
_______________________________________________
- BTW, In India the even is commonly referred to as the Bhopal Gas Tragedy. When people talk about Unio Carbide and Bhopal, they call it the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, not the Bhopal Disaster. CAn you undo the name change?
Title case note
Moved this from Bhopal Disaster to Bhopal disaster to meet Manual of Style conventions. -Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 06:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Dow Chemical Co accepts full responsibility
- Proof? - rernst 14:42, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC) Former content was:
- According to Reuters [2] (http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6987580), on the 3rd December 2004, Dow Chemical Co, in a major policy reversal, accepted full responsibility for the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India; a company spokesman, Jude Finisterra, was quoted as saying:
- "Today I am very, very happy to announce that today, for the first time Dow is accepting full responsibility for the Bhopal catastrophe; this is a momentous occasion. We have a $12 billion plan to finally at long last fully compensate the victims including the 120,000 who may need medical care for their entire lives and to fully and swiftly remediate the Bhopal plant site. We have resolved to liquidate Union Carbide, this nightmare for the world and this headache for Dow and use the $12 billion to provide more than $500 per victim, which is all that they've seen."
- This story is untrue, BBC released a statement later on 3 December 2004 that the statements are false and that there is no $12 billion dollar deal.
Worst disaster in the history of the world?
The case is definitely very severe, but do we have a source on it being the world's worst?