Talk:Indian Point Energy Center

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of the New York State WikiProject, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to the U.S. state of New York. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Bulletin: The next New York City meetup is Sunday June 1st.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
WikiProject Energy
Energy Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy.
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid importance within energy.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.


It appears as though a fear mongering business,IPRadMon, is editing this page in the hope of getting some business. Notice the similarity between the "controversy" section and their website? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.156.201.125 (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The use of the words "ill informed" activists makes me believe that the writer of this article was grossly inadequate or had not read the rules for posting.

Come on... this is not the place for apologists for nuclear power to post their propoganda. There's way too much of that in this article-- please remove it. Better yet, there must be other articles that already cover that controversy in depth; why not just link people there to get all that?

Contents

[edit] Witt Report

What about the major report issued by the emergency safety expert Mr. Witt that came out a year or so ago? andy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astewart123 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Obscured Site

While poking around on Google Earth, I noticed that a large area encompassing the IP site is pixilated at high zoom, and appears artificial (there is a clear line of boundary). I'm assuming that this is stratigically done to prevent terrorist recon. Would this be entry-worthy? Considering its proximity to NYC, it does present a real terrorist target, as mentioned in the article, but I don't know if including an observations such as this is important enough to include. Any thoughts? Davepetr 23:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Google Earth does that for a lot of Nationally important sites. I don't think this is anything unusual, maybe a mention on the Google Earth page would make sense. -Christopher Kraus 18:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

This article seems to have a lot of "what ifs". I propose a major re-write. Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 16:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Not sure if I agree with the "NPOV" header here, because I don't think the anti-nuclear view here really deserves to be treated as legitimate (hint: if you're worried about nuclear power plants exploding like an atomic bomb, you can go argue with the laws of physics). Having said that, there's not enough source-citing going on around here. So I'm with you on a rewrite. Collard 00:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

The article seemed reasonable. more sources must be sited. perhaps a rewrite is needed but not a total one. although power plants don't blow up the way bombs do, they release about 36x the radiation. I forgot the name of the sight i got that from but i know it is chernobyl related. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.190.150.146 (talk • contribs).

The NPOV tag has been on the article page for awhile now, but there have been no specific claims of NPOV problems (aside from the above general comments) in this talk page. I recommend citing the non NPOV text from the article here in the talk page before re-adding that tag. Thanks. --Howrealisreal 03:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


I inadvertently had published a version with redundant content due to an editing error. The version as of this time and date is intended to restore improperly deleted content, improve NPOV, and perform some general cleanup and wikification.--Ana Nim 19:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the need to revert to that previous version. If anything, that version has too many problems in it compared to the rewrite, which is essentially (more or less) the same text. Specifically, Wikipedia:Words to avoid (a Wikipedia manual of style) indicates that we should not use "controversy sections", neither is the Indian Point article a place to debate the pros and cons of nuclear energy in general (which your revision does [without sources even] by claiming some environmental benefits compared to combustion of fossil fuels). The focus of the "call for shutdown" section is clearly in regard to the article topic-- the plant-- with points laid out the same way as the reversion, even including rebuttals by Entergy, FEMA, and the NRC in why they feel the plant is safe. I don't see how the revert is any better or more NPOV, it just seems convoluted and unnecessary to break up information that belongs together into "controversy" and "media coverage" sections. --Howrealisreal 20:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
No response so I try this rewrite. --Howrealisreal 00:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In literature?

In the literature section it does not mention that the literature was inspired by numerous actual reports made by security guards. I've been thumbing around old ufo reports and noticed several reports in just 1984 alone. I like to encourage someone to look into considering a section that at least mentions that actual reports had been made and inspired the work of literature. I suggest as a starting point searching "Incident at Indian Point Reactor Complex, N. Y. 1984" or searching through old report records.

(Sources: Doris Graziano, APRO Bulletin, June 1985, p. 8; Larry Hatch, U computer database, case 14168, citing George C. Andrews, Extra-Terrestrials Among Us, p. 302; J. Allen Hynek & Philip J. Imbrogno, Night Seige: The Hudson Valley UFO Sightings, p. 148; Dennis Stacy, Field Guide to UFOs, p. 120; Peter Brookesmith, UFO: The Complete Sightings, p. 128, J. Allen Hynek & Philip Imbrogno, Night Siege, p. 143).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.127.187.34 (talk) 05:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)