Talk:Seoul Halloween crowd crush

Requested move 30 October 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus to switch out Seoul for Itaewon will not seem to arise. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Seoul Halloween crowd crush → Itaewon Halloween crowd crush – There seems to be some disagreement above over the article title, so we might as well start an official discussion on this. Q: Should the article be renamed from Seoul Halloween crowd crush to Itaewon Halloween crowd crush? Some1 (talk) 17:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Reliable sources are overwhelmingly saying "Seoul". The only major source I found calling it "Itaewon" was BBC. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

  Itaewon was the exact area where the crushed happened, saying Seoul is like telling the people that the crush happened in Seoul downtown or something like that. Massacreek (talk) 11:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  Itaewon is a district of Seoul. It doesn't need to be that specific. That's like saying there was a crush in Islington instead of London, which many people aren't familiar with. Saying Seoul instead of Itaewon makes it easier to realize where the incident actually took place. Also, Seoul doesn't have a definite "downtown." There are many districts, with Itaewon being a trendy one, Gangnam and Apgujeong being upscale, Jung-gu being a government area, and Jongno-gu being a historical center. The island Yeouido also functions as a major financial center. Seoul doesn't have a "downtown."

  Itaewon isn't important enough information. 160.72.156.226 (talk) 13:50, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Neutral - Either way is fine with me. Love of Corey (talk) 17:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose This event occurred in Seoul and should be titled as such, as has been the case in reliable media sources. Additionally, everyman readers are more familiar with Seoul than Itaewon. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 17:55, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Right now, the most used WP:COMMONNAME is Seoul rather than Itaewon, as it dominates English-language coverage of the event. This means that it's the most natural version of the title. Pilaz (talk) 18:23, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - We already had a discussion about this above. Few have heard of Itaewon. There's no confusion between other crushes. More importantly WP:Article titles tells us that we should use the "1) The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with" and "2) The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for". The use of Itaewon in the title violates this. It also tells us that "4) The title is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects" - which eliminates the possibility of using Itaewon at all in the title. Another WP:CRITERIA is that "5) The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles" - and many examples have been given of how the use of the city, not the neighbourhood, is done previously. Obviously if it had occurred elsewhere in metropolitan Seoul like Inchon or Suwon, then that name would be in the title - though Korean Halloween crowd crush would work as well, which satisfies "3) The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles" Nfitz (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Are there other crowd crushes in Seoul at other times of the year that this would be confused with? Putting Halloween in the title, gives the impression that the event happened on Halloween - not the previous week. Would Seoul crowd crush be a better fit of WP:CRITERIA? Nfitz (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

I think I'd be down for 2022 Seoul crowd crush in that case, for specificity's sake. There may have been other crowd crushes in Seoul's history. Love of Corey (talk) 18:51, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

"Seoul crowd crush" is too broad IMO. The majority of reliable sources mention Halloween in their titles and report how this incident occurred during the Halloween festivities. Just like how Highland Park parade shooting isn't named 2022 Highland Park shooting. Some1 (talk) 19:16, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Broad how? Though adding the year solves that. As for Highland Park - it isn't called Highland Park Independence Day parade shooting. Nfitz (talk) 20:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but it's still isn't called 2022 Highland Park shooting - "parade" is still included in the title and without the year. Some1 (talk) 20:23, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

There were not many sources that used Independence Day in their headlines. Though, we could rename it Highland Park Fourth of July parade shooting based on the sources. :P In any case, there were Halloween parties going on during the weekend. Removing Halloween makes it a bit clearer that events were going on at the time. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:41, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Also note, that not even the Korean language version (ko:이태원 압사 사고) mentions Halloween in the article title! Nfitz (talk) 20:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

And the Korean article title says Itaewon instead of Seoul. Some1 (talk) 20:23, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Not only Korean, but Japanese, Classical Chinese, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Indonesian article title also mention "Itaewon" spesifically, although in Indonesian "Halloween" were mentioned. 180.254.169.174 (talk) 21:40, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a black ribbon on Google's home page (at least in Korea) - hovering over it shows "In memory of the victims of the Itaewon Tragedy".

Also, searching up "Seoul Crowd Crush" outputs the result as "Itaewon Halloween crowd crush" on the main page of results.

Just saying - Google is recognizing the name as "Itaewon" and not "Seoul". The BBC, Yonhap News, JooangAng Daily, KBS, and various other big and small news agencies are also calling it "Itaewon Crowd Crush" or simply "Itaewon Crush" (In their English articles) - Though many other international news agencies seem to be using "Seoul" while specifying it in the articles themselves. 211.229.11.70 (talk) 11:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Some people do not even know what or where Itaewon is (until they find out what happened.) Seoul is a more known topic. Sarrail (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - Almost all English language headlines I have seen regarding the event say Seoul. Seoul was also the most heavily googled word in many US states during the aftermath of the event, not Itaewon. Maple Doctor (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - It's referred to as Seoul in almost every English source, and most English speakers are more familiar with Seoul than Itaewon. StartOkayStop (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I find very few sources mentioning Itaewon in their headline. Current title is sufficient. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 22:44, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. Itaewon would be the most accurate usage; however, Seoul is the most common. People generally know where Seoul is. If Itaewon were to be used, future readers might presume of a town outside of Seoul. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 22:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment So far I found zh, ja, ko, th wikis use "Itaewon" in their names. It might come down to their respective language speakers' familiarity with the area of Itaewon. For example, in Thai language media, they exclusively prefer Itaewon (even BBC Thai) since the area is widely known in Thailand. [zhwiki: 2022年首爾梨泰院踩踏事故 (2022 Seoul Itaewon Stampede) / jawiki: 梨泰院群衆事故 (Itaewon crowd accident) / kowiki: 이태원 참사 (Itaewon disaster) / thwiki: เหตุฝูงชนเบียดกันจนเสียชีวิตในอีแทว็อน พ.ศ. 2565 (Human crush to death in Itaewon 2022)] --Chainwit. (talk) 00:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

@Chainwit.: Don't forget, in Indonesian, Malay, and Vietnamese Wikipedia, they also refer article title as "Itaewon" exclusively without mentioning "Seoul" [idwiki: Tragedi Halloween Itaewon (Itaewon Halloween tragedy)/ mswiki: Rempuhan Halloween Itaewon (Itaewon Halloween stampede)/ vnwiki: Vụ giẫm đạp Halloween tại Itaewon (Itaewon Halloween stampede)]. Maybe, Asian language speakers have more familiarity with "Itaewon" than English or other language speakers. 180.254.169.174 (talk) 02:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Most English-language sources refer to Seoul, not Itaewon. WWGB (talk) 01:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Agree but with certain revisions + reservations. Is it proper to use "stampede" rather than "crowd crush"? As an example, the 2006 tragedy in Manila is titled "PhilSports Stadium Stampede" (commonly "ULTRA Stampede") and in the same article "crowd crush" was specifically used as an elaboration.
  Main topic: As per Nfitz & Some1 as well as 180.254.169.174:
  • Seoul is too broad when the incident only happened at Itaewon area, and it would give the false impression that a huge incident happened in the entire Seoul rather than a specific area. Relatedly, the other Asian Wikis overwhelmingly use Itaewon.
  • The incident didn't happen on Halloween day (31 October) itself, only the party was Halloween-themed; both Korean Wiki and the equivalent Namu Wiki list the incident dates as 29-30 October, hence why the Korean article doesn't include "Halloween"
    222.127.55.97 (talk) 03:53, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Itaewon is more specific, but it is a district within Seoul anyways, and Seoul has been generally used in English language reporting since it's much better known compared with individual areas within the city. To give a related metric, worldwide according to Google trends on searches, Itaewon has been searched more than Seoul in recent days on average. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%207-d&q=itaewon,seoul. However, Seoul has mostly been more common in majority English speaking countries like the US. Saucysalsa30 (talk) 03:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose While I really really really want it to be called Itaewon, the location is only really known within Korea. ALL expats know of Itaewon, and this is our personal tragety. I'm reeling from this as it's very personal for me as I'm within that group and had friends there. But, I fully understand, if this was in Myeongdong, or Insadong, or pretty much anywhere else in the city, again, being that specific would only be useful to people who have lived here or know a good chunk about the country. Simply saying Seoul, while I dislike it, is the better choice. ₪RicknAsia₪
• Rename to Itaewon disaster. This name is known in the press internationally and is becoming one of East Asia’s worst human disasters. 142.116.158.236 (talk) 07:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  I like this, maybe Itaewon tragedy? 2601:189:57E:4B70:1451:EDA2:3BA7:C30B (talk) 19:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Agree Seoul is way too inexact, the Greater Seoul area is bigger than all of Jamaica. It'd be kinda like calling the "Columbine High School massacre" the "Colorado School massacre". Making naming decisions based on ignorance is generally a bad idea. Djungelurban (talk) 09:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Agree, in principle As my previous statements, we need a more specific area/district where the stampede/crowd crush were happened if a place already known overseas. Exactly, Itaewon is the recent case (at least in the Asia-Pacific region) where the district are already known outside Korea itself (Remember "Itaewon Class"), while keeping the clarification in the article that Itaewon is located in Seoul in order to appease English-speaking world outside Asia who didn't knew where Itaewon located, also to avoid impression that Itaewon is located outside Seoul. 180.254.169.174 (talk) 11:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Reliable sources in English overwhelgminly refer to this as in Seoul.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:55, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Agree As per what I've flagged up above when the article was created. Other similar accidents were built tailored with specific area/district which the incidents occurred. If the word 'Seoul' needs to be included just for familiarity, then it should have been Seoul Itaewon Halloween Crowd Crush. Incident happened in Itaewon specifically, it isn't right to put a city with so many districts in it for familiarity instead of the exact location where the incident took place. I personally also feel that we shouldn't bring news reports as comparison because most media outlets would definitely use Seoul because people knows where Seoul is. But as a wikipedia page about this specific incident, it should've been the spot which the incident took place.

Yienshawn (talk) 12:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Agree The specific event occurred in Itaewon itself, even though most of the headlines name its news articles with Seoul. As most of the headline names overwhelmingly put Seoul in it, the body states explicitly that it occurred in the area or district of Itaewon. I do agree with 180.254.169.174 that the article name doesn't have to alleviate the non-English speakers. This may also confuse whether Itaewon or Seoul is from different areas of South Korea when Itaewon itself is located in Seoul. It is crucial these times that information regarding the such topic is specific and not too broad for readers to understand. ReVeluv02 (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose If we refer to WP:COMMONNAME, it states that "the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." Almost all credible english-speaking sources refer to it as the Seoul crowd crush. The Columbine argument (by Djungelurban) doesn't work because the vast majority of news sources referred to it as the Columbine massacre. "Seoul Crowd Crush" would be too broad, yes, but "Seoul Halloween Crowd Crush" is much more specific. Caidren (talk) 16:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Comment It feels like something hinky is happening here. Suddenly, we have an influx of infrequent editors and never before used IP accounts coming in to "Agree" rather than "Support" this. With little explanation on why WP:COMMONNAME should be ignored and in abeyance of WP:CONCISE. It's also not clear what is being agreed to, as the proposal is to completely remove "Seoul" from the title - not just to add "Itaewon" - which would be a completely different discussion. Also, reading today's newspapers on my doorstep, (which actually highlights South Korea, before either Seoul or Itaewon), the impression I'm left with, is the vast majority of victims aren't even from Itaewon! Nfitz (talk) 16:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, the proposal here is to change the title from "Seoul Halloween crowd crush" to "Itaewon Halloween crowd crush". -- MelanieN (talk) 17:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Exactly! Which would completely remove "Seoul" from the title! Nfitz (talk) 20:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Indeed, I was thinking that. I have no idea what summoned them here, if anything, but in any case RM discussions are decided by strength of argument, not voting, and the WP:COMMONNAME policy is clear on what should happen./  — Amakuru (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per above. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!}
• Oppose per WP:RF--most of our readers are familiar with Seoul, rather than the specific commercial area within Seoul, Itaewon. As Caidren said above, WP:COMMONNAME states that "the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." The English sources that discuss the Halloween crowd rush place the occurrence in Seoul. The English Wikipedia should do the same. Academic Challenger (talk) 22:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

  In this case though, the fact that it is a premier commercial area is central to the incident, because that is where people usually go celebrate festivals, and it is not exactly a surprise a big crowd turn up in the area, which is why the police planning is now under so much scrutiny. It is not like an incident randomly occurred somewhere in Seoul. If heaven forbid a similar incident occurred in Times Square,Soho,Shibuya,The Bund,Lan Kwai Fong etc, i doubt the title would just include New York,Tokyo,Shanghai or Hong Kong only. Plus why we can't put both Seoul and Itaewon in the title? 218.188.197.158 (talk) 04:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

  • • I'm not familiar with the last 3. Soho would always be a poor choice, as for most people it's a neighbourhood in central London - full of bars, etc.; but maybe you are referring to SoHo not Soho? I'm not sure Times Square is big enough for such a huge crush event, any more than it's London equivalent - Piccadilly Circus. But ignoring that including both would violate WP:Article Titles - there's plenty of examples of where this could have been done but hasn't. For example the Great New York City Fire of 1845 in Manhattan; I'd argue that Manhattan is better known worldwide than Itaewon! Nfitz (talk) 07:29, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

      i do mean the Soho in London the bar area, cause all the bars that should be fully packed in Halloween is actually pretty comparable to Itaewon. Honestly i was initially very surprised that someone would be not familiar with three of the largest entertainment districts in Asia, but then i realize i am not very familiar with ones in Europe or US either. (I actually thought SoHo,Manhattan was also a bar area). Needless to say i am living in Asia(Hong Kong to be exact). Utimately i felt that is the exact point: put the region in the title encourages people to find out more about the area is like and think more about why and how this kinds of tragedy keeps occurring in different part of world despite all the lessons and techs in place. 218.188.197.158 (talk) 04:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Comment From these discussions, looks like those who opposed the page move are Westerners who little or no known about Korea, while those who support are Asians who are already known about "Itaewon" as a district of Seoul. While i didn't support the page move as "Itaewon halloween crowd crush", the district should be emphasized more in the article. 114.125.230.53 (talk) 23:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
• Agree. Admittedly, I live in Korea, but the expat community here obviously all calls it the Itaewon crowd crush, and it will likely be people in the region primarily accessing the page in future. The term Seoul does not seem specific enough to me. I also suggest that both names be used in the title: "Seoul Itaewon Halloween Crowd Crush" or "Seoul Itaewon Halloween Stampede." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keneckert (talk • contribs) 10:29, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose As most sources are referring to Seoul, per COMMONNAME.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - there is not and hopefully won't be any other 2022 Seoul crowd crush, so there is no need to be so specific. FunkMonk (talk) 18:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
• Neutral, with comments Whether this article be called as Seoul Halloween crowd crush or Itaewon Halloween crowd crush will likely depend on the region where the audience live. If the audience come from a English-speaking countries (non-Asia Pacific region) or Western World, they will likely calling the name as Seoul Halloween crowd crush as they are likely not known about what the district of Itaewon is or is Itaewon part of Seoul or even English-language source are more referring as "Seoul" per WP:COMMONNAME. Meanwhile, in Asia-Pacific region (particularly East Asia and Korea itself), they will likely calling the incident Itaewon Halloween crowd crush as they are more know about the district of Itaewon than Western counterparts. But remember, in Wikidata they called the incident as the Itaewon Halloween crowd crush, a name that has followed and used by Asian Wikis. 125.167.57.106 (talk) 20:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
• Agree/support, for the reasons the the Love Parade disaster was not the Duisberg Crowd Crush or the Astroworld Festival crowd crush was not the Houston crowd crush. Itaewon crowd crush would reference the specific site where the crowd crush took place. Using language such as the Seoul Halloween crowd crush would suggest it was a citywide event which it was not. Therefore, I support the move to Itaewon Halloween crowd crush. Words in the Wind(talk) 22:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Additional comments, though the event was first commonly called the Seoul crush event, as more information became available, major news sources are now commonly calling this the Itaewon event. link 1, link 2, link 3

• Support because as a person who live in Asia, while searching for this article, I naturally typed Itaewon on the search bar (this fits WP:CRITERIA although I can't speak for people who live elsewhere) and actually found Itaewon murder case instead. If the propose move failed, I would like to suggest making Itaewon Halloween crowd crush a redirect to this article. Lulusword (talk) 11:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

It already is. WWGB (talk) 11:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

• Agree - I don't think WP:COMMONNAME applies here, that's more for articles that have multiple names for the same thing (Germany vs. Deutschland). This event doesn't have multiple names. As a counter-example to the Opposers, let's say the crowd crush happened in Brooklyn, New York City. Would we call it the NYC Crowd Crush or the Brooklyn Crowd Crush? My guess is that the latter would be the name used. Itaewon is more specific and relevant for a large city such as Seoul. I'm also in favor of dropping Halloween from the title and just using the year. The Halloween aspect isn't necessary for the title. The argument that more people know Seoul vs Itaewon seems asinine to me - the point is to name the article properly, not use the most generic name possible. By the same argument, we could name it the South Korean Halloween Crowd Crush because more people know about South Korea than Seoul. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

As already pointed out above the Great New York City Fire of 1845 in Manhattan would suggest otherwise - despite Manhattan being much better known in the English-speaking world than Itaewon. This is a perfect example of where WP:COMMONNAME is used. The English media have almost universally put Seoul in the headline, and only later mentioned the central Seoul neighbourhood. Nfitz (talk) 19:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

That's actually a bad example. New York City was not consolidated until 1898 - the cities of New York (Manhattan) and Brooklyn were actually separate until then, they were considered twin cities by some. See History of New York City (1898–1945). Manhattan was in fact the only part of New York City at the time, so calling the fire the Great New York City Fire is totally fine. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 20:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Further, we have instances in NYC where explicit neighborhoods are used in the title and not NYC itself. See 2008 Times Square bombing and 2010 Times Square car bombing attempt, Kew Gardens train crash, Hague Street explosion, East Harlem gas explosion, Crown Heights riot. It is fairly common for neighborhoods, boroughs, etc to be used in article names for various disasters, attacks, and unrest, and not the city as a whole.

You have 2013 Tiananmen Square attack in China, which happened in Beijing. The Los Olivos stampede, which is the name of the district in Lima, Peru. The 2016 Russell Square stabbing in London. The 2022 Strépy-Bracquegnies car crash, which is a village in a city in Belgium. 2017 Finsbury Park attack in London. These are examples outside New York City.

The argument about how it is being reported in the media is a good one. I'm not up to speed to see what the majority of media has called this event. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

That's a good point about New York City - there are are other examples though, such as 2018 Toronto van attack which was more precisely in North York - a district much larger than Yongsan, and in a neighbourhood Willowdale very much larger than Itaewon; locally it was referred to as a North York event, not a Toronto event. As for the other examples - if you simply put the bigger city, you've got issues, as there's more than one major stabbing or car crash in London per year. And more than one bombing a year in New York City. I can't speak to 2022 Strépy-Bracquegnies car crash, as I've neither heard of the incident, or the place - the article itself looks very poor. That being said - how it's commonly referred to in the English media is far more important than anything else, assuming that it doesn't need further disambiguation. Nfitz (talk) 04:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Further, even the Asian media isn't primarily using Itaewon, and is frequently giving Seoul (and even South Korea on occasion) more prominence. Examples Singapore, Jakarta, Jakarta, Japan, Hong Kong, Israel, India. There are some counter-examples - such as North Korea and the Philippines. Nfitz (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Presumably is mostly happened at English-language media. But in most native language sources in Asia, their media primarily using "Itaewon". For example is the Yahoo Japan news about the event, Berita Harian Malay language source, Mandarin language source, etc. Arabic language sources i believe primarily using Seoul. So, i believe there are more regionalism and language audience factor here. 180.254.161.206 (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

As this is the English-language version of the article; as per WP:COMMONNAME only English-language sources are considered when naming articles. Though a quick survey of other Latin script languages confirms that it's not just the English-language media French, German, Romansh, Portugese, Danish, Afrikaans ... Nfitz (talk) 04:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:RF, natural. This is the Wikipedia in English and most English speakers around the world have never heard about Itaewon (I have just learnt it here, and I'm a reasonably educated person), so they would be unable to find the article about this disaster if the title was changed to Itaewon etc. --MaeseLeon (talk) 01:42, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose not because of media precedent or common name, but because of recognizability (natural) and reader-first article titles (WP:RF). Even though I know of Itaewon and first searched for "Itaewon crowd crush" on WP, it's unreasonable to think that anyone who's not Korean or interested in Korean culture would know that district name. But, with a redirect. Zacanger (talk) 03:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

  I really don't follow this logic. Look at the 2022 Morbi bridge collapse. If I were to search for this article/event, I would be searching for "Indian bridge collapse" on Google and WP, because there's no way I'm remembering the city of Morbi. Recognizability as described here is a poor reason to decide on an article name in my opinion. The first line of the any article will tell you the locational context of an event (the neighborhood of Itaewon, in Seoul, South Korea). 71.11.5.2 (talk) 15:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

  I'm with you and many others on this which I've been trying to explain. I look at the list of Crowd collapses and crushes and have zero clue where most of those places are. if WP:COMMONNAME needs to be put in place, many of those articles would definitely need renaming. Los Olivos stampede that happened in Lima. I don't even know where Lima is and I am very sure many other people don't. So should that have been Peru Stampede? This is a simple logic and sufficient enough to use the exact location where the incident is. When I search Kanjuruhan Stadium disaster, I would google Indonesia Stadium disaster. I will never be able to remember the name of that stadium if I am not an Indonesian and so do every single one of you here. Thus if specific articles were started based on the vicinity of the incident, why are we debating over here whether Itaewon is well-known enough for English / non-English speaker? In that case, Kanjuruhan Stadium disaster should definitely be named as 2022 Indonesia Stadium disaster? Yienshawn (talk) 15:57, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

  All good points. I'd assume that the Kanjuruhan Stadium incident just follows the long-time precedent of other stadium disasters. But I'd also think that a name change discussion would also eventually end in moving it, given that even the Jakarta Post is referring to it more as East Javan or Indonesian in their own titles. They already had 2 move discussions (stampede vs disaster and whether or not to remove 2022, given the lack of any other disasters at that stadium this year. Morbi - I'm seeing references going both ways - perhaps because English is an official language throughout India - while Gujarati isn't (there's far more major Indian newspapers publishing in English than Gujurati). I'd have gone with Gujurat Bridge myself ... but I expect that consensus would lead to Morbi. It all comes down to the policy. Feel free to start a move discussion on the stadium incident. Nfitz (talk) 21:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

  em... the irony? Lima is the capital of Peru which is the 3rd largest country in South America? Gujurat is bigger than Florida in size and about double the size of Scotland? The fact that there are thousands of stadiums in Indonesia? 218.188.197.158 (talk) 03:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  Ultimately this is a slippery slope: How famous is famous enough and who is to judge? Obscure for some is common knowledge for others, and it is dangerous to assume. Media precedent and descriptions aren't perfect but at least there is some sort of standard. Also, at bare minimum, at least the city the incident occurred should be mentioned, not some random non-descriptive terms like East Java, West Montana or Northwest Brazil. 218.188.197.158 (talk) 03:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  I disagree with the justification that other similar articles with potentially obscure titles means this one should also be hard to discover for casual WP users. (I would support Los Olivos Stampede being renamed to Lima Stampede, and Kanjuruhan Stadium disaster -> East Java Stadium Disaster for example). Zacanger (talk) 03:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: Horrible idea per above reasons. Spilia4 (talk) 23:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: Itaewon is moonspeak. The average joe knows where Seoul is, hence the press headlines. Wikiguru64 (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:RECOGNIZABLE, and I would be money this proposal would also fail WP:COMMONNAME. I have yet to see a single new source refer to it by the proposed name.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Most English speaking person knows Seoul, but not Itaewon.Regpath (talk) 12:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

To add to article

Detail to add to this article: according to eyewitnesses, some of the young men who were pushing people downhill were chanting, "One, two!" as if the pushing were some kind of competition (reported in multiple sources). 204.11.186.190 (talk) 18:58, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Please provide those multiple sources here. WWGB (talk) 00:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Right now, the only source I could find was: a Koreaboo news site. Sarrail (talk) 00:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/world/asia/seoul-itaewon-crowd-crush.html Yug (talk) 🐲 06:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Remove discussion of gender disparity in fatalities?

I refer to this paragraph, under Victims:

The majority of the people who died were women. According to a professor of fire and disaster prevention at Soongsil Cyber University, women's bodies are less resistant to pressure than men. However, a professor of crowd science at University of Suffolk claimed that evidence of women being more prone to compressive asphyxia is inconclusive. He did note that women have smaller frames than men, with more body mass in their upper chest (meaning less room to breathe if one's chest is crushed inward), while men have more upper body strength and "have a higher chance of literally clawing their way out of the situation".

To be entirely honest, when I came across this article, the inclusion of this analysis struck me instinctively as plain insensitive, not least as the point seems inconclusive/moot.

Nevertheless, unless the disproportionate number of female fatalities received notable news coverage/public discussion in this specific tragedy, I think this passage is better moved to Crowd collapses and crushes and removed from this entry, seeing as the disproportionality presumably applies more generally in crowd crushes (and, in that article, the discussion could be better supplemented with any sources outside of this tragedy). MB190417 (talk) 08:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Or, if the point has received notable coverage, then that should preface this paragraph. MB190417 (talk) 08:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Lot of changes and future suggestions

Hi, I just did a big reorg/rewrite of the article. The content should mostly be the same; mostly changed ordering/presentation of the information. Please feel free to change anything I wrote if you disagree with the changes, I have no ego about my writing and am just trying to help.

Some suggestions for future improvements:

• Briefly discuss the Sewol Ferry incident in the background section, as it comes up over and over in the article and in public discussion about the crush
• Investigate if there was an impact on the notable LGBT community in Itaewon, and discuss it in both background and somewhere in the body

toobigtokale (talk) 06:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh and the pandemic information should also be part of the background too; it's probably what contributed to the unusual surge. toobigtokale (talk) 08:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Potential source to add

BBC recently published an article which talks about the long term affects of the crush on survivors and the area. https://www.bbc.com/news/67203564 Leaky.Solar (talk) 19:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)