Talk:Great Flood of 1993

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

what about someone who believes in a Great Flood brittney s rules

That would be covered under Great Flood, which redirects to Deluge (mythology). - jredmond 22:23, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

i think that this website is not smart because someone could easily edit and destroy this website....--65.188.212.23 18:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And it's just as easy, if not easier, to fix the place. - jredmond 20:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

I just spotted a piece of vandalism from the page, in the causes category, but it was removed before I could correct it, just thought it might be useful to mention. TheNightTerror 2:10 am, August 30, 2007

What about Iowa?[edit]

There's some discussion of the early-season flooding in Iowa. Perhaps someone could get a picture from there? IIRC, it did quite a number on Des Moines. Renaissongsman 14:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do know that the Cedar River did have an overflow during this flood. I was one of the youngest survivors at the time. Bramblestar (ShadowClan Leader) (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ever since the Iowa Flood of 2008, I've been researching both the Great Flood of 1993 and Hurricane Katrina. Cedar Rapids was damaged by the Flood of 1993. From watching my city's downtown area become submerged, I learned about a storm that happened from July 4th-July 5th in 1993. My house wasn't hit either time. Bramblestar (ShadowClan Leader) (talk) 21:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

better pic needed[edit]

I can't believe that the barn pic is the best thing anyone could find. Doesn't anyone else remember the river roaring through that levee breech and just annihilating that farmhouse, then bulldozing all the trees for a quarter-mile?--Mike18xx 08:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think I do. At any rate, I've replaced the photo with one that might have more impact. IIRC, we I visited the Missouri Capitol that summer, it was even a tad higher than what is shown in this photo from the Army Corp Of Engineers. Renaissongsman 14:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The caption needs to be changed -- the Capitol was never in danger. It is at significantly higher elevation than the flood waters (tens of feet at least). The extent of the flood was mind-blowing, but our Capitol was safe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.5.62.70 (talk) 15:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agreed. It's roughly 50 feet of elevation between the driveway of the House Parking Garage shown in the picture which was threatened at the highest point of the flood (577ft [1]) and the lowest entrance of the capitol (621ft). The capitol was built on a natural high point, then the hill was built up around it up to the level of the basement. (I don't know a good online source for this part of the construction. There are pictures of the process, plans and blueprints on display in the basement of the capitol near House Hearing Room 3 and House Hearing Rooms 6 and 7. That said, those details are likely not relevant for the Wikipedia article.) I am going to change it to "limited access to" instead. I don't know if such a caption needs a reference, but the Secretary of State has a picture [2] from another angle that shows how close it came to total closure of roads approaching the capitol from the west side. 168.166.55.11 (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ topograhpic-map.com
  2. ^ https://www.sos.mo.gov/Archives/Bicentennial/Adversity

The flood and KC's airport[edit]

This article states that the was the impetus for the creation of a new airport (KCI) away from the river, in reference to the downtown airport. I thought that the need for KCI arose out of the fact that the runways of the downtown airport could not be expanded to handle larger jets, constrained by local geography (one end of the runway ends right at the river). There were other reasons for building it way out there that had to do with planning the growth of the city, and though I'm having trouble pinning it down, I don't recall the need to escape the possibility of the river flooding being a significant factor. Anyways, I'll mark that segment as citation needed for a bit and see if anyone knows the answer. --Reverend Loki 16:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The damaged airport was Fairfax Airport in KCK (where TWA had its overhaul base and where Mid-Continent Airlines delivered the airmail). I rewrote the section to make it clearer. Americasroof 17:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

water volumes in relation to flood height[edit]

Someone should document the controversy between what the Corp of Engineers says and what academics (who imho know what is going on) say about what historic flood volumes were and how the Corp changed historic floods amounts, some say to make it look like the levee program had less effect on flood levels. Books were written by Robert Criss and Pinter if I remember right.

My first comment, I hope I did it right.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.81.244.221 (talk) 15:33, 9 March 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia! You got it close, but not quite right. Might want to glance oer the talk page guidelines when you get a chance. Remember, new comments go on the bottom of the page, and always sign your talk page posts. I'm assuming you tried to do so with the three equals signs, but that's not the right symbol to use. The best way to sign is with four tildes (~), which is found in the upper left corner of your keyboard (most likely, anyways). I also highly recommend that you create an account and sign into it whenever you make an edit - helps you to keep track of what you've done, as well as creates a unique identifier for yourself on here, and makes it easier for people to leave you messages. Anyways, you make some excellent points... --Reverend Loki 22:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note, I wonder if the figures quoted in the introductory section of this article should also have the United States customary units conversions, for those who use that system of measure instead of the metric system. [[Briguy52748 00:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)]][reply]

since this is an article on a US flood, and the rest of the article uses US units with metric conversions, I'm wondering why there aren't primary customary units in the intro. --J Clear 02:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to have noted the total volume of water comparisions between the major Mississippi floods. I'd be willing to bet that the total volume of the 1993 Flood was several times that of any of the other floods. It didn't just last a week or two. It lasted months. Water was a problem the entire summer, over pretty much all of Iowa, southern Minnesota, eastern South Dakota & Nebraska, northern Missouri, and also in Wisconsin and Illinois. --71.214.221.153 (talk) 04:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Wife Link[edit]

There's a link to wife in the causes section which I think should be removed. The page on wife doesn't bear any relevance to this page and the presence of the link only serves as a distraction to the reader. Note, I'm not proposing to change any of the text, merely to remove the link (I'm not sure if it would be considered a minor edit which is why I brought it up here). Aluchko 00:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flood marker[edit]

I've uploaded a flood marker from St. Charles, MO if there is any interest in using it for the page. --Kenneth M Burke 23:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This marker in St. Charles, MO tributes City staff and citizens by indicating the high water mark during the flood.

??[edit]

$15 Billion Bajillion in damages? 24.16.45.133 (talk) 00:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Flood of 1993 caused a very large amount of damage. For more information, read Flood: Wrestling With the Mississippi By: Patricia Lauber








Prevention Techniques[edit]

Just a thought, this topic could maybe include the flood preventions put in place as a result of the floods ... that is, if there were any.

Many years ago the mississippi river flooded and then it lastred for about 144 days it was bad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.236.121 (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Orleans[edit]

Why was the lower Mississippi spared? 97.85.163.245 (talk) 07:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great Flood of 1993. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Mississippi River flooding" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mississippi River flooding and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 20#Mississippi River flooding until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Talk 00:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“The whole of downtown St. Louis would have been under water” LOL[edit]

No. No it wouldn’t have. St. Louis was built on top of the western bluff of the river valley. Even at 52’ of flood it would still have another 40ft of flood before it topped the “first” street downtown. Come on. 2600:1700:7AA0:CE90:A166:2F33:1377:6EBA (talk) 07:30, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Ridiculous statement for many reasons. Removed. Schierbecker (talk) 03:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Great_Flood_of_1993&oldid=1207100153"