Talk:2006 North Korean nuclear test/Archive 1

message: I found it interesting that Venezuela even spoke out against the test. If someone can find the quote that the Venezuelan Government released, it's definitely worth noting, just because usually anything that goes against the United States is something Venezuela supports. (As far as I know it was not a statement directly from Hugo Chavez).
Mientkiewicz5508 23:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: China voiced some concerns too. By the way, this kind of discussion page is not the place for partisan politics. Whatever grudge you hold against Venezuela (or against any other country), it would be foolish to believe that their diplomacy is unidimensional. Hugo Dufort 02:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: China called it a 'brazen act' according to the BBC. I don't know about Chavez. Walton monarchist89 09:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Venezuela

message: whats up with this stock market business? thats def. orig. research
:Actually, I heard that on CNN and the BBC just a few minutes ago... it wasnt me that added it but it seems to be correct.  And not just South Korean stocks, apparently all the Asians are down a bit Cm205 04:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't me either but it was also on the local news here in NZ. I believe the South Korean stock market was closed for 5 minutes to calm things down. I believe oil prices are up as well above the US$60/barrel mark Nil Einne 05:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Original Research

message: It said South Korea's Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources had detected a tremor of a magnitude 3.58 to 3.7 at 0135 GMT. from :  mokaiba
: That may have just been a prelude to the 6.2 earthquake in Tonga (0150 GMT)
-->tonga is 4 hrs ahead of north korea  tonga earthquake happened at 150am oct 8th, NK did test oct 9th 1pmmokaiba
USGS website now lists a 4.2 mag event having taken place in North Korea.
::But if it's true that NK gave China a 20 minute heads up, then that supposition isn't likely.  ...unless NK has made a major breakthrough in earthquake predictions.  Rklawton 04:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it rather strange that NK would give China a heads up given that one of the reasons they apparently became so desperate to carry out a test ASAP was because of China's condemnation of their plans. Then again I've never really understood the minds of many insane world leaders be it Kim Jong Il or GWB Nil Einne 05:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Info 

message: Do we have any official news links saying this actually happened or is this just self-researched news?  And if so, lets please try to make this page as accurate as possible, as this is major news. Effer 04:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As opposed to what?  I think this article is pretty well sourced.  It reports that various agences are reporting... Rklawton 04:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that, but often in such situations, news agencies tend to jump to various conclusions. Effer 04:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hence the "current event" tag.  Rklawton 05:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess we'll just have to see what happens then. Effer 05:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Info! 

message: I have removed the first part of the "official announcement" text, because it didn't appear in the original announcement from the cited source.  If it's genuine, it needs a good source.  The removed text is "The citizens of the North Korean nation salutes our heroic leaders in making this great leap in achievement in defeating the international band of imperialists led by the chief imperialist George Bush. We salute our Dear Leader who continues the legacy of our Great Leader in building our proud nation into a bastion of socialist paradise." --Reuben 05:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly sounds like the DPRK media. Probably genuine. Walton monarchist89 09:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see four problems with it.  First, it's unsourced.  Second, it gets zero hits on Google News.  Third, KCNA doesn't usually use "Dear Leader" any more.  It sounds to me a lot more like somebody trying to imitate North Korean rhetoric.  And indeed: Fourth, it was added by a user with a history of fabricating quotes. --Reuben 16:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official announcement 

message: There is a quote in the Introduction, I think, pertaining to the fact that the Google Earth view of the area where the test is presumed to have taken place is standalone, a picture in its own right.
So? Who cares? What difference does it make? So, some old satellite imagery was taken of it... sure, it is supposed to be a missile testing facility. 
What does this have to do with news? If you want an official reason to get rid of the quote, anything to do with Google Earth would be original research, and the research does not indicate anything of value to a news piece, or any piece on the wikipedia.
EDIT: Secondly :P What is the point of the Pakistani section under "International Response". It just says "No official comment". Why is this country listed under "International Response" if it hasn't yet actually responded?
:Because "No comment" is a response in of itself. It says many things, most noteable that they don't know what to make of the situation yet what face they should show the world. Least noticeable they're assessing the direct threat to them of the event - especially in the case of Pakistan who has a history of "loosing" or letting slip through the blackmarkets rocket parts to countries on the international shitlist. Shadowrun 20:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the point of... 

message: I'm not opposed to an Analysis section.  However, it should include well-sourced perspectives from expert analysts and should be carefully written.  In my view, the Analysis section that I deleted did not meet these criteria.  -Scottwiki 10:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of Analysis section 

message: It says in there "The yen also fell to a seven-month low against the US dollar while oil on the world market rose above US$60 a barrel." I'm guessing Korean yen, but I don't know. --WikiSlasher 11:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How could a extinct currency fall? You can link yen to its article or add "Japanese" behind if you don't think it's obvious and you don't mind to read a blue article.--cloviz 12:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I added that. Really I think this is extremely silly. I often defend the need for and international focus, clarity and to not assume the reader should know what we're talking about when there is room for confusion. And I also think we should be as fair as possible and not treat bigger and/or more popular uses of a word as the sole use in most circumstances. If there was a non extinct currency called the yen, even if it was a country with only 10k people I would have admitted my mistake and fixed it. But there isn't and there's a reason Yen redirects to Japanese yen. If you really want to change yen to Japanese yen go ahead I won't revert it. However if anything I only think we should wikify it but leave it as yen. Nil Einne 12:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  come on guys, there's been no Korean Yen since 1945 - even then, were they not issued by japan anyways? --Streaky 13:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dude, in international finance, dollar means United States Dollar ISO code USD, yen means Japanese Yen ISO code JPY, and Euro means European Union Currency ISO code EUR.  The first reference to "yen" should read 'Japanese yen', thereafter 'yen', and when quoting yen amounts 'JPY xxx,xxx,xxx'.  The won unfortunately is not as widely known and perhaps somebody else could fill this in.   Revmachine21 14:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Korean currency is known as the won (pronounced as "jaun") Drew1369 15:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the Korean won is pronounced exactly like the English word "one". Rhialto 00:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or equivalently, the English word "won." :-) --Reuben 01:38, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which yen? 

message: Any word yet on this event's effect on U.S. elections this November? Rklawton 13:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Former ambassador to South Korea, Donald Greg, stated on "Good Morning America" on October 9, 2006 that "I think in a way he is playing into the hands of the hard-line elements in the Bush administration who would like nothing better than to make North Korea part of the war on terror."  Rklawton 13:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems you have a problem with irony (as you deleted mine and one other poster's), so here's in clearer words: Nobody on Earth can know anything about this event's effect on US elections in the future. We can only speculate, but this isn't a place for speculations. --MartinSojka 14:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The matter at hand is what media analysts have to say on the matter.  Our speculations aren't permitted, but the speculation of experts is - and this information would be useful to this article on the matter of this test's impact.  Last week analysts were speculating that one or both houses might change over to Democratic control.  Is that still the case now? Rklawton 18:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The event has undoubtfully an impact on the speculations of so-called "experts", and we can add that to the article if you like (although I'm more concerned with SE Asia then with the politics of some country a third of a globe away from the event's site, so I won't go searching for it). It's still about five to ten years to early to write about the impact on the US elections themselves. --MartinSojka 20:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: American elections

message: User:Moore123456 is vandalising.  See the section on "Chewmerica", just after New Zealand.  Admins, how do we deal with him? Tjwagner 13:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Chewmerica"

message: "It is expected that the test will have significantly raised the radioactivity level in the region."
Not likely - NK says it was an underground test, and I haven't seen anything that says otherwise.  Unless they totally botched it, an underground test releases little or no radiation.  Certainly not enough to "significantly" raise the radioactivity level.  That sentence should either be deleted, or change to something like "Underground tests to not release significant amounts of radiation."
63.161.86.254 13:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Environmental Effects"

message: Is it normal for a chronology to start with the most recent event? I'm not sure how its usually done on wikipedia, but this seems backwards to me.  Harley peters 15:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. Go ahead and fix it. dposse 15:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Changed the order so that it ends with the most recent event. JPK 19:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology of events 

message: I think it's time we compose a paragraphy outlining the case for a non-nuclear explosion. Rklawton 14:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's better to say that people aren't sure and just link to some real sources for that, let them make their own case. I think it is best to stay fairly conservative when we are writing about reporting on speculation. Otherwise this will turn into a playground for everyone's pet engineering theories like the 9/11 pages. --Fastfission 14:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Links sound good to me - now that some are available.  Rklawton 14:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Now that I re-read the article, I see that these possibilities are sufficiently covered at this time. Rklawton 14:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: EMPs are not generally destructive except in intentional upper atmosphere blasts, but even an underground blast should release detectable EMP.  Astronomical gamma ray objects were first detected by US military satellites designed to use gamma ray observations to detect nuclear explosions. Hu 21:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gamma rays are completely absorbed by a few meters of soil. See , figure 27.16. For silicon ( main ingredient of soil ) you get peak attenuation length of ~25 cm, assuming density 2 g/cm3. Unless Koreans screw up and fail to seal the tunnel properly, or plant the bomb very close to the surface, there should be no gamma radiation on the surface at all. --Itinerant1 21:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: All this seems reasonable so long as its coming from verifiable sources.  Rklawton 22:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Since we do have a source speculating it's non-nuclear I think it's fair for us to mention minor scale. But I have to say personally I'm not so sure whether this is likely. It seems far more likely it was a fizzle. We know NK had the plutonium. All the info we have suggests they had the tech and resources to at least produce a fizzle. On the other hand successfully creating and properly carring out a controlled explosion especially if is larger then 1 kiloton say of this magnitude is likely to require a level of resources and expenditure and tech etc I would hope and think NK doesn't have. Oh and BTW, I would remind people we are talking about blast sizes i.e. TNT equivalent. A blast which have 1 kiloton equivalence would have required more or less material depending on what conventional explosive we're talking about Nil Einne 23:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dud?

message: As of this writing, a careful search of Google News has not revealed any reports of gamma rays or EMP Electromagnetic pulse, despite the existence of US and presumably Russian satellites designed to detect these. Search terms were "North Korea" in quotes combined in different searches with 'pulse', 'gamma', 'gamma radiation', or 'gamma rays'. Hu 20:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: EMPs are not generally destructive except in intentional upper atmosphere blasts, but even an underground blast should release detectable EMP.  Astronomical gamma ray objects were first detected by US military satellites designed to use gamma ray observations to detect nuclear explosions. Hu 21:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Gamma rays are completely absorbed by a few meters of soil. See , figure 27.16. For silicon ( main ingredient of soil ) you get peak attenuation length of ~25 cm, assuming density 2 g/cm3. Unless Koreans screw up and fail to seal the tunnel properly, or plant the bomb very close to the surface, there should be no gamma radiation on the surface at all. --Itinerant1 21:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Gamma Radiation or EMP 

message: Without evidence that strongly or definitively marks it as nuclear, it is good that "claims" is the third word in the article.  However, it would be usefully educational and Neutral Point of View to point out to readers of the article that there have been a number of kiloton non-nuclear blasts in the past 100 or so years.  N. Korea has an incentive to fake a nuclear blast if they are not capable of a nuclear weapon. Hu 20:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All this seems reasonable so long as its coming from verifiable sources.  Rklawton 22:32, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since we do have a source speculating it's non-nuclear I think it's fair for us to mention minor scale. But I have to say personally I'm not so sure whether this is likely. It seems far more likely it was a fizzle. We know NK had the plutonium. All the info we have suggests they had the tech and resources to at least produce a fizzle. On the other hand successfully creating and properly carring out a controlled explosion especially if is larger then 1 kiloton say of this magnitude is likely to require a level of resources and expenditure and tech etc I would hope and think NK doesn't have. Oh and BTW, I would remind people we are talking about blast sizes i.e. TNT equivalent. A blast which have 1 kiloton equivalence would have required more or less material depending on what conventional explosive we're talking about Nil Einne 23:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Educational to Mention Non-Nuclear Blasts 

message: I found an article about the reaction of the swiss: Swiss Reaction
Could someone add there reaction to the page. I'm not the best at major edits. --Zrulli 17:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Swiss?!?!?! 

message: "undermine various threats" is non-sensical and either a poor translation or mistyped "treaties". --Belg4mit 17:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippines 

message: Why is most of the lead a quote from North Korea? Christopher Parham (talk) 18:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that is the main story. That's how the rest of the world got the info that they tested a nuke, by the statement made by the N. Korean media. dposse 18:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quote in lead

message: Could somebody please tell me how to or where to go to properly cite sources.  The whole "References" section is throwing me for a loop...
Thanks,
Falconus|Talk 21:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing sources 

message: "The U.N. Security Council should congratulate North Korea for its nuclear test instead of passing "useless" resolutions or statements, North Korea's U.N. ambassador said Monday." --- Yahoo! News
I think it's hilarious. That's all. LOL XD --Heilme 23:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  North Korea wants congratulations 

message: I'm wondering why we need a second photo from Bush's speech, featuring, out of three people, only one who is even remotely relevant to the situation at hand (Dr. Rice).  No offense to Mr. Bolten or the First Lady, but they don't have much to do with this article.  Wouldn't an image of another world leader's reaction to the test be more meaningful?  Heck, even a photo of Kim Jong-Il would be more informative.  Kasreyn 23:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was also skeptical about the merit of that picture. However I had assumed it was there primarily there because it was one of the few free pictures we had available since I assumed it was from a US government source. Checking I found out it's fair use. As such, IMHO this picture has absolutely no merit in this article. Since unfortunately no South Korean has been able to provide a free image of protests that we can use, I suggest we include a fair use one from a newspaper for now Nil Einne 23:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the Rice, Bolton, and Lady Bush's picture. I think it has no significance whatsoever. Heilme 23:22, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of picture? 

message: reference 31 is blank. Either the code is messed up, or the citation just isnt there. Will someone please fix it? thanks. dposse 23:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  reference 31. 

message: I think that after 24 hours of furious and frantic editing this is, in the end, a pretty good article, better than many of the news reports and far better cited than any of them. --Fastfission 03:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now if only us nuclear experts had a frigging clue about the significance of the low yield... Georgewilliamherbert 05:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good job guys and gals 

message: Can someone move the Korean nuclear template to the left side, in order not to have the big gap after the Background section? Or teach me how to do it. Thank you.--Doom777 03:38, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Realign the template 

message: Someone could add that the earthquake (almost 4 degrees on the richter scale) from the testing was detected by Romanian quake detectors.
: Be bold and do it yourself --Doom777 03:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  sometimes it's good to reach a consensus before editing. people who have been watching articles sometimes know more about them and can direct new information in a more effective way. someone needs to write a rebuttal for wp bold. i don't think it works in a lot of cases. --gatoatigrado 05:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  wp bold is only a guideline, not a policy. any improvement in articles is welcome. --gatoatigrado 05:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romania 

message: I realize that it's the Wikipedia standard to start articles formulaically, but a sentence like "The 2006 North Korea nuclear test was a nuclear test which the Democratic Peopl' Republic of Korea ..." just sounds silly. I think it would be reasonable to start with "In 2006 the Democratic People's Republic of Korea claimed to have successfully detonated a nuclear test ..." or something that sounds like a person would actually say it. - Che Nuevara 04:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You want to have the title of the article in the first sentence of it. --Doom777 06:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence wasn't even complete. I've reworded it. -- Captaindan 07:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wording in lead 

message: I have not been looking at this page so if I do something it might be incorrect or not reflect other edits. this concerns the statement "International condemnation of the test has been unanimous, coming even from North Korea's closest ally, the People's Republic of China." isn't it important Iran had a slightly different reaction - to claim the test was a result of American arrogance? --gatoatigrado 05:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: someone needs to add the  after the sections. I have a nice monitor and the sections are running together. --gatoatigrado 05:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  test site location should be merged with yield, and renamed. the heading should reflect the suspicions whether the test was actually nuclear. --gatoatigrado 05:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree it was a bit misleading and I've changed it appropriately to include Iran's response Nil Einne 06:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  please edit 

message: Currently we have mention of the NK envoy's comment expressing disappoinment that they were not congratulated in the internatonal reactions section. Does anyone else think it should be moved back to here? It isn't really an 'international' reaction... Nil Einne 06:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The announcement is the DPRK reaction, so it can be added in that section. El_C 06:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does seem the best section but I changed the title as the title to me implied it was only about the first DPRK annoucement Nil Einne 07:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  North Korea reaction 

message: Where is the international reactions are gone? --Deenoe 21:01, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  International reaction 

message: I was thinking that maybe somebody should put in the actual quote from the N. Korean Officer.  Whats there now seems alittle misleading. Im sure that is what they are trying to do, but he never states it, or aleast the quote doesn't make any mention of it.--Hasty5o 04:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. An actual overt threat would've been headline-continued-on-page-2 material. We need a quote. --Kizor 09:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Threats to launch a nuclear weapon

message: I just caught that they had possible help on the radio... I do not have access to view news articules here at work so if anyone can elaborate alittle more it would be helpful. Drew1369r 19:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  N.Korea had help?