Talk:2021 Kaohsiung building fire

Casualty count

Gianluigi02, i believe the 14 taken to the hospital "in serious condition" were actually the ones showing no signs of life (i believe, in taiwan, they are considered to have suffered an "out-of-hospital cardiac arrest" or ohca) and were simply taken to the hospital so that they would be declared dead there. this source might better explain it. the 32 found dead at the scene were taken directly to the morgue, presumably because their condition was clearly incompatible with life. adding the 32 sent directly to the morgue with the 14 "in serious condition" gives the 46 reported deceased.

i don't know how the bbc determined that 79 had been sent to the hospital, but; i don't remember seeing the number reported elsewhere. dying (talk) 15:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC) [copyedited. dying (talk) 16:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)]

That's what I wrote: 32 people killed in the immediate aftermath of the fire, and 14 more who died at hospital due to their wounds. Gianluigi02 (talk) 16:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, now I have understood your speech better. All the victims died in the immediate aftermath. Thanks for clarifying. Gianluigi02 (talk) 16:11, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

It is possible that the number of causalities will increase once the building is fully searched. Notwithstanding, the numbers in the article are updated to be current as of today and I support the edit done by [[Gianluigi02]]. Jurisdicta (talk) 06:58, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 15 October 2021

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: Moved to 2021 Kaohsiung building fire Sceptre (talk) 00:34, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

---

2021 Kaohsiung tower fire → 2021 Kaohsiung apartment fire – This is not a tower, which is defined by Wikipedia as "a building that is taller than wide", however this building isn't technically a tower. While it is also referred to as a tower by some sources listed in the references section, it is also specified as an apartment (and is also called simply a building in some). Regardless of its definition, "tower" is also more ambiguous than "apartment", which better-specifies what this building is. Waddles 🗩 🖉 05:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Can we not just have 2021 Kaoshing fire per WP:CONCISE? No doubt there there have been other fires in Kaoshing this year, but not as notable. i.e. we don't need the type of building as a WP:NATURALDIS. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 06:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 03:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• It is also not an apartment building. " The lower floors [are former shops]. The 4th to 5th floors are abandoned movie theaters, and the 7th to 11th floors are residential housing units. [1] Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 07:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• How about using a more neutral and inclusive term such as 2021 Kaohsiung building fire? Chongkian (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Apartment implies a residential area, while from what I understand it has been used for commercial purposes I think? BeŻet (talk) 09:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose both current title & proposed title, because the building is neither a tower, nor solely an apartment block. It's a multi-purpose building which isn't very tall. 2021 Kaohsiung fire is best - it's short, simple, correct & unambiguous, because there haven't been any other notable fires in Kaohsiung this year. Jim Michael (talk) 10:22, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Waddles, you're right. my bad. i think i had named the article before seeing a picture of the whole building, and apparently took the use of the word "tower" in reliable sources at face value. i don't know if those sources used a different definition of "tower", but i agree that we should at least be consistent with wikipedia's own definition of tower.
  i hesitate to call the event an "apartment fire" because that may suggest that the fire was contained within one apartment. also, although some reliable sources have been calling the building an "apartment building", it has been used for commercial purposes as well.
  would 2021 Kaohsiung high-rise fire work? the building appears to fit all the definitions that wikipedia has for a "high-rise". dying (talk) 11:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  addendum: i had suggested including "high-rise" in the name because many of the wikipedia articles in the building and structure fires category have names that state what kind of buildings the fires occurred in. in addition, the article names of the previous two building fires featured on wp:itn had also stated what kind of building they occurred in: Tangerang prison fire (itn) and 2021 Baghdad hospital fire (itn). in any case, i'm clearly the only one here who thinks including "high-rise" is a good idea, while 2021 Kaohsiung building fire is my second choice, so i'm happy if that ends up being the consensus.
  i hesitate to use the name of the building because there is an issue with which romanization to use. also, the name of the Weierkang Club fire article suggests that the building had served as a club; the name of the building involved in this article does not provide similar information. dying (talk) 16:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support 2021 Kaohsiung building fire as it's not a tower or apartment, and we don't need to be pedantic about the building type. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Agree with User:Joseph2302. Support Support 2021 Kaohsiung building fire. Truthanado (talk) 13:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: It appears the deadliest fire in Taiwan is named as "Weierkang Club fire". Would it be possible to use Chengzhongcheng Building fire as the article title, which avoided the confusion of categorising the establishment concerned. Cypp0847 (talk) 14:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose and support. I oppose both names. It is not an apartment, nor could be referred to a simple "building fire" because Kaoshiung certainly has other building fires. I suggest using the name of the complex, e.g. Chengzhongcheng Building fire. This would go straight to the point what the article conveys. (PenangLion (talk) 14:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC))
  • Apparently while I was editing this comment, a similar suggestion was posted by Cypp0847. (PenangLion (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC))
• Oppose it is clearly not an apartment building, since it also contains business as a large proportion of its use. It is a mixed-use building. What about using the alternate suggestion 2021 Kaohsiung building fire or Chengzhongcheng Building fire (per the name of the building) ? -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 15:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I agree with you, along with Cypp0847's statement. Chengzhongcheng Building fire is probably the best candidate for the new name. (PenangLion (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC))
• Support Kaohsiung apartment fire - Per WP:CONCISE and the fact that deadly building fires as a whole are clearly rare in Taiwan, so the year is not needed in the title as a disambiguator. Love of Corey (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support Chengzhongcheng Building fire I find 64.229's argument particularly strong, since it is used for multiple purposes. It also follows the article naming style for Weierkang Club fire, which is a similar event. CodingCyclone ^{please ping}/_{my wreckage} 22:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support Kaohsiung building fire; the building is clearly not a tower, and as the IP said, it is a mixed-purpose building, not an apartment building; this also aligns with the terminology of some RS'. I will note for the closer that it seems to me that there is a consensus against the current name, but it is unclear to me what the positive consensus is - best of luck! BilledMammal (talk) 03:48, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• PS: "building", if used, should be lower case - it is a descriptor, not a proper name (compared to "Club" which appears to be part of the proper name in the given example) BilledMammal (talk) 03:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support 2021 Kaohsiung building fire per above. Ythlev (talk) 05:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Agree The building is not a tower. Support change name to Chengzhongcheng building fire or Cheng-chung-cheng building fire per Taiwan Romanization. Sgnpkd (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• I would prefer 2021 Kaohsiung building fire. This is the common name. Very few English sources use Chengzhongcheng building as the main subject. The name can be mentioned in the first sentence of the article but not the title. Sun8908 _Talk 16:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support 2021 Kaohsiung building fire with Cheng Chung Cheng Building fire and 2021 Kaohsiung tower fire as redirects. Oppose "apartment fire", as it was both a commercial and residential building. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support, I guess, because of what I've found the building is an apartment or "ghost building" - not necessarely a tower. GTNO6 (talk) 05:03, 18 October 2021 (UTC) Comment (changing my vote) as I think it's actually better to have a title like 2021 Kaohsiung building fire (per Jim Michael) as this is neither an apartment nor a tower. Therefore I Oppose both towers and Support a new one: 2021 Kaohsiung building fire. GTNO6 (talk) 14:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Also per Chongkian. GTNO6 (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2021 (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.

Kao and Huang

There is a lot more information about their involvement in the fire, can we get this added?36.232.53.195 (talk) 03:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

It's best to keep the speculation down, and cover the legal proceedings as described in reliable sources. What is currently listed in the English article matches its Chinese counterpart fairly well. Kuo and Huang were questioned, Kuo was granted bail. Vycl1994 (talk) 06:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Address

This article should at least mention the street name that the building is located. Otherwise it is like "a fire somewhere in Asia". Charliestalnaker (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

The infobox states Cheng Chung Cheng Building, No. 31, Fubei Road, Yancheng District, Kaohsiung, Taiwan as the location and it has a reference pointing to Taiwan News. So does this count as an address? --37.30.16.128 (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Y resolved. Charliestalnaker (talk) 22:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistency between title and infobox title

Hello, I just noticed that the title says "2021 Kaohsiung building fire" but the infobox title says "2021 Kaohsiung tower fire". I understand that this page recently got a page change and was wondering if this was kept on purpose. Thanks.

Sincerely,
Rafaelmanman (talk) 22:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Changed to be consistent, like it should be. Given how much people complained it wasn't a tower, I can't see people complaining about this change. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:41, 28 October 2021 (UTC)