Talk:The gadget

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

Was the Pu hollow? Midgley 11:42, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

• Partially -- it had to have the neutron initiator in it. But probably not as hollow as, say, it would need to be to have tritium inserted into it as with a booster. At least, that's my understanding of it. --Fastfission 16:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is gadget not a proper name (an individual bomb)

So should it not be capitalized: "The Gadget"??? Of course it should be.... right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.217.199.196 (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Second this. The names should be, in order, The Gadget, Little Boy, and Fat Man. --Chr.K. (talk) 09:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

No. It was a code word designed/designated not to bring attention to the actual device. Capitalization would have drawn attention. You can capitalize it post-facto, but not those guys in WWII. 143.232.210.38 (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)