Talk:2025 Tai Po apartment fire: Difference between revisions

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project’s importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project’s importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Wikipedia! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.FirefightingWikipedia:WikiProject FirefightingTemplate:WikiProject FirefightingFirefighting Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

@Bloxzge 025 and Kencf0618: Per image description, that picture was taken on 1 Nov, which is far from “the day before” (or “a day before” as in earlier revisions) the fire. Is the caption wrong, or have I interpreted English wrongly? 1F616EMO (talk) 16:01, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, @Kencf0618: You seem to have reverted a lot of edits (1324262249, 1324262291, 1324262314 and 1324262359) in revision 1324262573 due to an edit conflict. Please review the reverted edits and cherry-pick those that should be kept. Also inviting @Robertsky and WikiCleanerMan for this matter. 1F616EMO (talk) 16:07, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was a rush, and usually that’s not an issue. Shall be more discerning. kencf0618 (talk) 16:27, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to enable Paragraph-based Edit Conflict Interface in your beta features settings. It seems to help to merge edits in case of an edit conflict. 1F616EMO (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I WP:BOLD‘ly removed “the day” from the caption to minimize the risk of spreading misinformation into other languages. Also, I have notified the Vietnamese community on this matter. 1F616EMO (talk) 16:28, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@1F616EMO@Kencf0618@Bloxzge 025 According to the author of the photo that ’01’ is added by the system automatically. Ghostingb (talk) 17:51, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He said he only wrote ‘2025Nov’ when uploading the file, its not Nov1 Ghostingb (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve put the caption back, I see no reason to dispute the author’s claim that it was taken on the 25th. Padgriffin ^{Griffin’s Nest} 20:10, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m no expert on Hong Kong building codes and practices… Why were the buildings being renovated? What were the other two plans? Is is the usual practice to completely encase the buildings of such a densely packed complex in scaffolding? Etc. kencf0618 (talk) 16:23, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From my own experience: Yes, bamboo scaffolding is very common in renovations in Hong Kong. It might be worth it to discuss on renovation conventions in the article as background information. Note that what I said in the first sentence is original research, but I believe there do exist abundant sources. 1F616EMO (talk) 16:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Found a source about a building inspection in 2016. – robertsky (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also about Hong Kong’s use of bamaboo scaffolding, https://www.scmp.com/postmag/design-interiors/article/3318683/world-discovering-bamboo-scaffolding-hong-kong-phases-it-out – robertsky (talk) 16:54, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As for the other two plans. It is hard to tease out the information from Google with the current coverage. Will try again later. – robertsky (talk) 16:54, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More on background information: The Chinese article mentioned workers found smoking on the scaffolding.^[1] This information might be useful, but I wonder if that would be a WP:SYNTH. Should we mention smoking? 1F616EMO (talk) 17:16, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One might consider writing something like:

Smoking by workers that are on bamboo scaffolding, can carry risks in regard to fire prevention. According to at least one report in media, smoking has happened on the scaffolding at some point in time.–I do not have sources, at this point in time. ~2025-31417-21 (talk) 18:33, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, the buildings were being renovated due to the Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme. I found an article in Chinese about the other two plans, the first plan was to repair the damaged sections of the exterior walls using tessera; the second proposal was based on the first, with an additional layer of waterproof paint; both of these plans had an estimated cost of around 150 million HKD. The third plan, which was later selected, was to completely renovate all external walls and repave with tessera, with the estimated cost of 330 million HKD. Using the bamboo scaffolding with completely encasing the buildings is very common in Hong Kong, but there are allegations that the scaffolding used in the building that caught fire does not meet the safety requirements in the regulations. Sun8908 _Talk 18:49, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Tai Po apartment fire → 2025 Hong Kong apartment fire – Per WP:COMMONNAME in English-language sources, they all use Hong Kong rather than Tai Po in headlines, etc. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2025 Hong Kong high-rise fire, is better.–Note: at one time, several high-rises were burning at the same time, during this fire.–Generally speaking, an “apartment fire” is only in one of the (many) apartments in one apartment building.~2025-31417-21 (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Keep the current title. The term “Hong Kong” is too general. This proposed title is not precise. It ignores the vastness and diversity of Hong Kong’s geography and situations. Numerous building fires, big and small, occur in Hong Kong. Specifying the district is more accurate here. Please note that Hong Kong is one of the most densely populated regions in the world. Using the term “Hong Kong apartment” overgeneralizes the situation and complexity of the city. Unless it were on the citywide geographical scale of the Great Chicago Fire (which it obviously was not), I would not agree with the proposed title. Cfls (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I would prefer 2025 Tai Po high-rise fire or similar, I agree with 2025-31417-21 that “apartment” definitely does not cover the scope of this incident and with Cfls that “Hong Kong” is too general. 2025 Wang Fuk Court fire would fit precedent for naming similar incidents but I’m not sure if it passes WP:COMMONNAME given that the name of the complex isn’t even used in most Chinese-language sources Padgriffin ^{Griffin’s Nest} 21:22, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  2025 Hong Kong Wang Fuk Court Fire is agreed ~2025-36186-60 (talk) 21:41, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Current name is the right amount of specific. Only change I would support is changing “apartment fire” to “apartment complex fire”, which is how it was described on the mainpage.–DMartin 21:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support Wang Fuk Court tower fire.–DMartin 21:26, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the above. I agree with the above that Hong Kong is too general; it’s an entire provincial-level subdivision of China technically. I wouldn’t mind 2025 Tai Po apartment complex fire though. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:29, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“2025 Tai Po apartment complex fire” – good title. ~2025-31417-21 (talk) 21:43, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the above. Dalkskkskk (talk) 21:30, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that MOS:FIRSTLOCATION is applicable for “articles on buildings, venues, monuments, and other physical structures”. However, it’s overkill to mention that Hong Kong is in China. HK is one of these cities that’s well known enough that the country probably doesn’t need to be mentioned for clarification, not to mention its political status, which can be a complicated subject. I’ve shortened “Hong Kong, China” in the lead and infobox to “Hong Kong”. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I would argue that Hong Kong itself is a country(just not a sovereign state), so the PRC doesn’t need to be mentioned at all.–DMartin 21:36, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]