Talk:List of nuclear weapons tests

message: actual test dates w/ additional info such as bomb size, location, and time can be found @ http://www.ga.gov.au/oracle/nukexp_query.html  i will try to add some of this info when i can.
Somedude 07:27, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  test dates 

message: United States was powerful and they could test their bombs anywhere they wanted in the West in the early years. Why did United States test their atomic weapons on their land and in the Pacific Ocean, and not in Africa? 216.13.88.86 22:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a trick question. See Operation Argus. (sdsds - talk) 03:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the reason is that nonaligned states (which comprise most of Africa) wouldn't want to become embroiled in the Cold War, and it would create a huge international furore if any nuclear power chose to conduct nuclear tests on the soil of a sovereign state and not one that was a direct dependency. Chaparral2J (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why United States didn't test their atomic weapons in Africa in the 1950s and early 1960s? 

message: Please write in the list all nuclear tests with a yield over 10 Mt.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.209.198 (talk) 23:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. SkoreKeep (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of most powerful nuclear tests 

message: The image :Image:Pakistan Nuclear Test.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Pakistan Nuclear Test.jpg

message: In order to avoid having the same discussion on 2 articles, please see my post on the "Nuclear testing" article's talk page at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nuclear_testing#Need_reliable_sources_for_number_of_nuclear_explosions
Neither this article nor that one cite reliable sources.  Analoguni (talk) 22:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I like www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/index.html.  The database format is wretched, but if all you want is a number, that's easy, and there lots more information, like an impressive scenario of what a global thermonuclear war would look like to someone in the Rio Grande basin.  BTW, there have been a bit more than 2000 tests involving about 2500 individual nuclear devices from 1945 to present.  SkoreKeep (talk) 07:33, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need reliable sources for number of nuclear explosions 

message: I was wondering about the total heat produced by the hundreds of known tests.  This is in light of global warming, which is said to be produced by too many cars in China & New Delhi.  Which produces more heat?  A 1 kt burst, or a million cars running for an hour?  
Where did the heat go?  And why, in the early 1970's, at the height of nuclear tests, were scientists worried about planetary cooling?  Dave of Maryland (talk) 23:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the heat dissipated rather quickly. My personal theory is that the combined kicking up of dust eventually caused some temporary cooling, but that's just a personal theory. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, hold on a minute while I whip out a new napkin and load up google, and we'll see.
Let's see: http://www.iss.niiit.ru/ksenia/catal_nt/intr.htm says that there have been 520 Mtons of testing done with nuclear weapons of all kinds. http://www.unitconversion.org/energy/megatons-to-joules-conversion.html converts that into about 2.2e+18 joules (with the assumption that all those megatons stay right here keeping the home fires burning; we'll claim to have those few photons that hightailed it for the gamma quadrant). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy tells us that there are 174 petawatts incoming from the sun (1.74e17, thanks to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peta-) and that's 1.74e32 joules/sec (thanks again to http://www.unitconversion.org/power/petawatts-to-joules-per-second-conversion.html).  Our 520 Mtons of testing would supply about 4e-19 secs of the total insolation of Earth.
The world burns 5e17 BTUs per year (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/world.html), which is 5.3e20 joules per year (http://www.unitconversion.org/energy/joules-to-btus-it-conversion.html; love those folks) or 1.6e13 joules/sec.  In terms of our energy use, all the atomic testing ever amounts to about 38 hours of the total energy burning done by man.
Google/wikipedia/MSCalc is your friend.  SkoreKeep (talk) 22:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heat 

message: ∑ Mt of all tests? 46.115.10.220 (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ~ 520 MT  SkoreKeep (talk) 09:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

text: See Worldwide nuclear testing counts and summary.  It actually turns out to be more like 540 Mt. SkoreKeep (talk) 17:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ∑ Mt  

message: "Because it was a cold test,[13] the Pakistan Atomic Scientists Foundation (PASF) estimated the yield at no more than around 12–25 kilotonnes.[12]" Now, that is some subcritical test.  According to the definition of a cold test on the referenced page, a cold test is a test of a nuclear bomb without the nuclear material in it.  No explosion not involving nuclear has ever gotten above about 7 kT (that was the N1 moon rocket blowing up at Baikonur), so either their wrong about the yield, or they're wrong about it being a "cold test", or they invented some hellacious HE and will rule the world soon. It is likely they mean 12-25 tonnes, which is still quite large for a primary HE.  In any case, I could not find the quoted yield in the references, so I think the figure needs to be trimmed...err, pruned. SkoreKeep (talk) 09:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Pruned it; removed mention of testing figures and the references, which were only vague recalls, nothing that could actually be looked up. SkoreKeep (talk) 03:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pakistan Subcritical tests 

message: The table on this page and the contents of any nuclear tests infobox are generated from a database of nuclear testing which I have maintained and researched for a number of years. The table is automatically generated from that database by a Visual Basic script, and then has, periodically, been inserted into the page manually. I began doing this in October of 2013.
Recently a user complained (politely) to me about the practice.  It seems to him that it removes control from all editors besides myself over the content.  He believes it is tantamount to WP:OWNED of the pages affected.  He also points out that there is no public mention of the fact anywhere on wikipedia, and that is true, through my own oversight, until now.
There was no intent that the pages affected should be owned by myself; in fact, one of my reasons for building these pages was to solicit (in the wikipedia way) criticism and corrections to the data, perhaps additional references that I had been unable to locate. I have regenerated the tables twice in the days since they were originally placed.  Each time I did so, I performed a diff between the current version and the version that I put up in the previous cycle; all corrections were then either entered into the database or corrected in the programming, as appropriate.  As may be guessed, the programming corrections were frequent to start out as suggestions about the table formatting were raised, and most incorporated. I have not made judgements on the "usefulness" of corrections; all have been incorporated, or I have communicated directly with the editor to settle the matter.  In fact it was in pursuing such a correction that this matter came up.
I am posting this comment on the Talk page of every page containing content which is so generated. If you would like to comment on this matter, please go to the copy on Talk:List of nuclear tests so the discussion can be kept together.  I will also be placing a maintained template on each Talk page (if anyone would like also to be named as a maintainer on one or all pages, you are welcome). I solicit all comments and suggestions.
SkoreKeep (talk) 01:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: The table on this page is generated by database

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of nuclear weapons tests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012160826/http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf to http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131219131618/http://www.iss-atom.ru/ksenia/catal_nt/ to http://www.iss-atom.ru/ksenia/catal_nt/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225154407/http://www.dva.gov.au/media/publicat/2006/nuclear_test/dosimetry/pdf/dosimetry_chapter_1_introduction.pdf to http://www.dva.gov.au/media/publicat/2006/nuclear_test/dosimetry/pdf/dosimetry_chapter_1_introduction.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401181303/http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/june/chagai.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/june/chagai.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401181303/http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/june/chagai.htm to http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/june/chagai.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Comes 78.148.122.201 to change the number of Soviet tests from 727 to 981, saying "i changed the number of nuclear tests carried out by the soviet as they were old dates".  The number chosen is the number of devices used in the 728 tests performed; many of the tests fired multiple devices simultaneously in a local area; they are called salvo tests, as explained at the top on this same page.  All the nuclear pages in wikipedia count tests, not devices (as do all of the supporting documents I'm aware of, though they mention the device count). I reverted it before I understood where the number came from for a lack of reference, which was true.  SkoreKeep (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of nuclear tests

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of nuclear weapons tests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100414084207/http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Pakistan/Nuclear/chronology_1983.html to http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Pakistan/Nuclear/chronology_1983.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Comes 82.208.127.202 wanting to change the yield of the Tsar Bomba from 50 to 58 MT.  This has been argued multiple time before (see Talk archives) and the result is that US seismic measurements made of the bomb concluded 57 MT.  After the collapse of the USSR, the papers written by the Sarov scientists listed the yield at 50 MT, and thereafter that figure has been used, as they were on the site making the best measurements.  Although his edit in Tsar Bomba mentioned "all Russian writings" since 1992, there is no references named. In this article, he references the Russian web page for Tsar Bomba, which is insufficient.  I have reverted this page (for the second time) and have placed a CN on the Tsar Bomba page which I will act on in a week.
82.208.127.202, if you do have a reference, I will certainly consider yielding this point; I'm always interested in accuracy, even on small points. Contact me through my Talk page and we can discuss this, and I'll assist you if you need it.  SkoreKeep (talk) 07:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Tsar yield 

message: Comes 148.253.221.44 who wants to change the number of British tests from 64 to 21, and remove the note about the zero-yield Vixen tests (safety/dispersion tests) being added in.  The precedent set when compiling the US tests was that the number was to include the safety tests (usually but not always zero yield).  The rationale is that if such a test is not zero nuclear yield, which indicates it failed in its goals to some extent, and then it is a real nuclear test, and to include just some of the US safety tests would be misleading.  So all have been included, even in the official US test listings.  By extension, then, safety tests are included for all countries if known. The stated purpose of the Vixen series was safety and dispersion testing. I have reverted the edit.  SkoreKeep (talk) 22:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: When I went to do the reversion, I find he already reverted it himself.  SkoreKeep (talk) 23:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: British total tests

message: I think the introduction could be improved a lot. It starts with a long technical definition of something hardly relevant for a list. I would have expected a brief overview over nuclear weapon tests and the content of this article: Which types of tests are there, how many in total, by which countries, a rough overview over the timescale and so on. --mfb (talk) 13:12, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: > Very few unknown tests are suspected at this time, the Vela Incident being the most prominent. Israel is the only country suspected of having nuclear weapons but not known to have ever tested any.
Such text is yet another proof that USA is merely the 51st member state of Zion and Wikipedia is a loyal minion... It has been well-known for over a decade that Vela Incident was a joint 3kT neutron bomb test conducted by the apartheid and the zionist regimes, post-apartheid South African Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad confirmed that and the 550 tons raw uranium swap deal. 84.236.83.221 (talk) 15:38, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is less brave than Gunther Grass was. 

message: Can we just have one list please?
I don't want the tests split by country.  Just list every test, in chronological order.    Too much commentary also. 172.56.81.106 (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This "list" is absolutely terrible