Talk:Nuclear engineering

message: The article states that the U.S. gets 78% of its electricity from nuclear power. The WIKIPEDIA article "Nuclear Power in the U.S." says that it is 19.2 %. Significant discrepancy. One of the smart guys who really knows something about this area should make the correction.
LAWinans (talk) 00:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia disease. Such data is spread all across and should be consolidated pointing to/coming from official (grid, utility, gov agencies) sources. Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Btw. is part of "energy markets" etc. 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error 

message: This article reads like a brochure, and excessively uses first-person pronouns to refer to nuclear engineers. Needs a major overhaul. Cleanup template added. - Forteblast 18:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Still needs "major overhaul", does not reflect the decades-old and wide field of NE. Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brochure 

message: "While some officers have undergraduate backgrounds in nuclear engineering, most have earned their undergraduate degrees in other engineering disciplines. Also, most of the enlisted students hold no college degrees at all."
::How can most people both have degrees and not have degrees?  Are officers not enlisted students?  If there is a difference between enlisted men and officers, I think this needs to be pointed out.  Lcolson 18:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, officers are not enlisted students, just like black isn't white.  It's kind of in the very definition of officers and enlisted.  Izuko 21:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My bad, I didn't know the difference.  I think the now linked words clarify this well.Lcolson 22:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Phrasing on navel nuclear power school

message: I am locked in a revert war with Elerner on Aneutronic_fusion#Residual_radiation_from_a_p-11B_reactor. See Talk:Aneutronic_fusion#Radiation_dose and Talk:Aneutronic_fusion#End of the road (bullet point Radioactivity). There are personality issues between us, but I think there is a substantial question of content as well. The issue is essentially whether the radiation problems of a p-B11 reactor are actually negligible or merely manageable. (Aren't edit wars silly?) Both of us have experience in plasma physics and fusion reactors, but have only dabbled in radiation assessment. (Although Lerner might characterize himself as an expert.) If someone from this page feels competent (and is interested in taking on a thankless and likely fruitless task), I would appreciate your input. --Art Carlson 09:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add it yourself.-Theanphibian (talk • contribs) 20:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for help on [[Aneutronic fusion]]

message: While I agree in part with the removal of the list of colleges, I feel that they still have some value and have put them back in.  
Technically, the outside links account for just less than half the links in the section...  I think the lists would best be put in another article and linked to in this one however, cause as its currently included it takes up too much space of the article.  
But just deleting them seems a little harsh, since I think that a large proportion of people interested in nuclear engineering may be interested in seeing which institutions offer the degree.  Also, the lists and links are technically accurate, and verifiable.Lcolson (talk) 04:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I say it direct. This list should be delete or massively consolidated. What Wikipedia is not, point 12. Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 14:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: List of colleges offering degrees

message: This section includes only a few subfields in nuclear engineering, but neglects other major fields such as fuel cycle management, reactor design, operations design and support, and fusion R&D. Mmdk22 (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Valid, this article is not well written at all. It took me ~3 sec to conclude. Multiple issues and major aspects of NE missing. Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 14:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional areas incomplete 

message: After long experience, mostly editing leads, I've come to dislike opening paragraphs that define their topic either in a dictionary mode, or by direct quotation of cited authorities. 
Since its birth as a discipline in the twentieth century, the definition of nuclear engineering has evolved from its initial focus of "getting power from nuclear fission" to the broader concept of "nuclear engineering as any application of nuclear and atomic interactions:
* "Nuclear engineering is an endeavor that makes use of radiation and radioactive material for the benefit of mankind." 
* Nuclear engineering "deals with the science and application of nuclear and radiation processes."
I think this lead rather delays matters unnecessarily. What happens when the lead is filled with quotes is that few editors are willing to wade in to make small changes. You can't edit a quote without breaking the quote, and if you break the quote, you might break the citation, and is this all really worth the bother? And so it sits there in a mediocre state with little editorial participation for long spans of time. 
That's my perception anyway. — MaxEnt 01:22, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What would you suggest as a alternative? Dennisraymeier (talk) 22:25, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead is hard to edit 

message: Both tables in Nuclear engineering schools and training and Where nuclear engineers work should be removed or largely consolidated. What Wikipedia is not, point 12. Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables 

message: Sentence "Nuclear engineering was born in 1938, with the discovery of nuclear fission." ... improvement: "Nuclear engineering began in the 1940s as soon as the potential for "atomic power" generation from nuclear fission was realized." Kr 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  History