Talk:Tracy Arm

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Glaciers High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glaciers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Glaciers 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.GlaciersWikipedia:WikiProject GlaciersTemplate:WikiProject GlaciersGlacier
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alaska Mid‑importance

	Alaska portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska 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.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Separate article for the tsunami?

Latest comment: 22 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The tsunami mentioned in the article seems like it would be notable in its own right; would there be interest in creating a separate article for it, or should it stay as part of this one? Cooljeanius (talk) (contribs) 17:50, 26 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm in favor of a new article. The Lituya Bay tsunami has its own separate article from the geographical Lituya Bay. Another source: https://theconversation.com/alaskas-near-record-landslide-tsunami-sent-a-wave-1-580-feet-up-the-fjord-walls-and-left-clues-for-building-a-warning-system-282017 Subarcticsensing (talk) 19:11, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Oppose split - section in question only has 5 lines, if the split article going to become a stub and nothing more, it should just stay merged. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 15:53, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

"A 481-meter-high landslide-tsunami in a cruise ship–frequented Alaska fjord"

Latest comment: 2 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The referenced Science article is open-access and is quite accessible, with eyewitness accounts, drone footage after the landslide, and dramatic reconstructions of the event. Link: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aec3187 Published 6 May 2026

Definitely worth your while to browse this. I'm bookmarking the paper here as a reminder to return to it. A landmark event. Pete Tillman (talk) 15:08, 8 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Also see this article in Eos:

https://eos.org/articles/the-forensics-of-a-skyscraper-sized-tsunami/

The bold fool paddling his Zodiac at the glacier's new foot!

Published 6 May 2026. Pete Tillman (talk) 15:15, 8 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

should it have a separate article? AloneSlk (talk) 18:36, 11 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think that's a good idea. Second largest megatsunami in recorded history (so far) should merit its own article. There are important lessons to learn: Don't let cruise ships visit an area, like this, near the time that a tsunami is likely. And a warning system should be devised.The ice will keep melting. This isn't the last big landslide, as the glaciers retreat. Pete Tillman (talk) 22:14, 12 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Separate article for the tsunami?

"A 481-meter-high landslide-tsunami in a cruise ship–frequented Alaska fjord"