Talk:Starfish Prime

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sources?

Is there a source for this information? I'd like to learn more about high-altitude nuclear tests. Gary 19:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Could this be why there is a hole('dimple') in the ozone layer? S0703

  • I seriously doubt it (but I'm not a nuclear scientist). The ozone layer is spontaneously produced from free Oxygen in the upper atmosphere. The ozone depleting chemicals break down the ozone, theoretically faster than it can be renewed. These chemicals include nitric oxide (NO), hydroxyl (OH), and atomic chlorine (Cl) and bromine (Br). Some of thse are produced in a nuclear detonation in small quantities, but not to the same level as was pumped into the air from aerosol sources. Atmospheric science is a tricky thing, and there's not so much a "hole" in the atmosophere the same way there'd be a crater for decades after a test. BLP 16:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Civilian Damage

This article could benefit from a blurb regarding whether the owners of damaged electronics were compensated or not as a result of this test. Long distance microwave antennae aren't cheap.

  • I too would like to see some cited sources about EM radiation damage. Is there a site that would keep track of such expenses?-Blake Dayton 01:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Needs sources"?

What is meant by this? There are at least six sources linked. —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 19:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess the paragraph about the problems with Bluegill test could use a source about that. The paragraph about the effects of the EMP on infrastructure in Hawaii could probably use a source, as could the narrative about Trainor, which I didn't find in the main article on Trainor (which incidentally reads like a {{resume}}).
I was also hoping that it could be made clearer what the sources are supporting, maybe with footnotes and proper formatting (with info in case one of the links eventually goes dead).
Also, the article only has one section and it is quite long. Plus, I don't think I've seen a quote that long before in an article that wasn't quickly removed.
Maybe {{wikify}} wasn't the best template to use, but I think it is more encompassing than some others. Ufwuct 20:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
If I read correctly, the long quote is declassified US government material. If it's US government produced, then it's usually considered public domain. It's possible that it would even be ok to use the text inline, and make modifications to it, but someone would have to check up on that. -Kieran 22:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Section/Cleanup tags

It seems the above discussion resulted in a {{section}} tag. I've now sectioned the article, moving a bit of text around to where it seemed to fit best. I've left a cleanup tag, however. Firstly, the section about other Thor rocket tests probably belongs in the Operation_Dominic article, rather than this one. Secondly, although there are references, there are still quite a few unreferenced claims, and it would be better for the references to be listed in full at the bottom of the article. (This would also allow dubious references to be identified.) -Kieran 22:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Outer space

In what sense was this test in "outer space"? It is a woolly term. Just "space" would be better. Or how about describing it as outside the Earth's atmosphere? This would be true for most definitions of the atmosphere. 192.102.214.6 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 13:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)