databeautifier

databeautifier OP t1_jb14bb9 wrote

Reply to comment by joker_wcy in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

Correct. However, I've just realized thanks to the link from u/denisrennes that the 1975 Banqiao Dam failure article gives an upper estimate of 240,000 deaths while the List of Accidents and Disasters by Death Toll page listed a single 171,000 figure. I use the past tense here because I just edited the page with a correction.

Regardless, the visualization rounds all figures (as stated in the image and my top-level comment) so both 171,000 and 240,000 would result in the same 2 squares being shown.

10

databeautifier OP t1_jb13egb wrote

Reply to comment by tremynci in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

u/tremynci is correct: the source (listed in the visualization and my top-level comment) has the 1957 Mayak nuclear waste storage tank explosion as the all-time deadliest nuclear disaster with 200-6,000 deaths. I took the high end of this estimate (also mentioned in the visualization and my top-level comment).

Chernobyl is listed by the source as having a high end estimate of "4000+" with the note:

>Far higher death toll estimates have been made, but are disputed.

I took the Mayak disaster rather than going with disputed figures.

2

databeautifier OP t1_jb122sb wrote

Reply to comment by arrig-ananas in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

Thanks for the idea for comparing against smoking! I just may create a comparison for that in the future. :)

Depicting the exponential growth was definitely the hardest challenge of this visualization for me. I didn't want to just use a logarithmic bar/column chart because I find them boring and that people don't really understand them visually, so I opted to try something less conventional. I remembered this style of chart from somewhere and tried to at least hint at the increasing values (besides the explicit legend) with a red gradient and increasingly larger { brackets on the left. Any tips for how I could show this better? I'm pretty new to data visualization and am looking to learn.

3

databeautifier OP t1_jb0zemt wrote

Reply to comment by Majestic_Food_4190 in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

The source categorizes them separately and I followed that categorization. The deadliest earthquake was the 1976 Tanghan earthquake and it does mention that some coal mines flooded but doesn't say how many deaths this accounted for out of the total figure of 655,000. The 2011 Japan earthquake caused 19,759 deaths but also doesn't break down deaths due to flooding. I'm sure there's an overlap between them, but I don't have the data to show that it would make a big enough difference to change the all-time deadliest in each category.

1

databeautifier OP t1_jb0yetb wrote

Reply to comment by Norville_Rogers__ in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

Yes, it's for the deadliest Maritime accident. The source lists the SS Kiangya as the deadliest with an upper estimate of 3920 deaths which I used and then rounded up (see explanation in the viz and my top-level comment) to 4000. I don't think the intentional sinking of the MV Wilhelm Gustloff would count as an accident because the top of the page says:

>Purposeful disasters, such as terrorist attacks, are omitted; those events can be found at List of battles and other violent events by death toll.

2

databeautifier OP t1_jayxv1u wrote

Reply to comment by TheOneNeartheTop in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

Per the source, it actually was the failure of Banqiao Dam in 1975 and includes deaths due to subsequent diseases and hunger in addition to the initial flood. I can see the perspective that it should be categorized as a flood since it did include one, but the cause was a structural collapse and I put it in the visualization as one because the source (Wikipedia) categorized it that way.

13

databeautifier OP t1_jaypfgq wrote

Reply to comment by rjwilson01 in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

The source (cited in my first comment here) lists the "Nedelin catastrophe" of 1960 as the deadliest in the "space" category with a range of 54-300 deaths. As noted in the visualization and my first comment here, I rounded up to the maximum deaths in cases where a range like this were given.

I can see a perspective where this doesn't count as a space accident/disaster because it occurred on the ground before the rocket was launched, but the source categorizes it that way. All the other accidents/disasters in the list also occurred on the ground or in the air below space except for one: Soyuz 11 where three people died due to depressurization in space. I just decided to go with the source's categorization since they all took place as part of spaceflight operations.

20

databeautifier OP t1_jayoiqm wrote

Reply to comment by ar243 in [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

I agree that comparing single events to the summation of all events over a time period can be misleading, but I don't think that's the case with this post because I called that difference out in four places: the post title, the all-red title text of the visualization, bold text in a box around the traffic deaths, and my first comment here.

The other comparisons you mention are of course valid, but I think this kind of comparison is valid too provided the different time scales are prominently called out.

34

databeautifier OP t1_jayg7cm wrote

Reply to [OC] All-Time Deadliest Accidents and Disasters vs. One Year of Traffic Deaths by databeautifier

Design:

I wanted to put annual traffic deaths into the context of other accidents and disasters. For example, the all-time worst aviation disaster caused 583 deaths which is a little less than 3.8 hours of average global traffic deaths. The range of values is huge and I didn't want to simply use a logarithmic scale on a bar chart, so I used this style which I've seen elsewhere on the sub a few times. If anyone knows what this kind of visualization is called, please let me know.

Notes:

All death counts rounded to nearest square.

When sources state a range, the maximum deaths are used.

Tools:

Draw.io

Sources:

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565684

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_disasters_by_death_toll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_avalanches_by_death_toll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_costly_or_deadly_hailstorms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_by_death_toll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pacific_hurricanes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tornadoes_causing_100_or_more_deaths

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foodborne_illness_outbreaks_by_death_toll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_volcanic_eruptions_by_death_toll

3