Talk:Soviet atomic bomb project

message: "Under the administration of Beria, the NKVD co-opted atomic spies of the Soviet Atomic Spy Ring into the Western Allied program, and infiltrated the German nuclear program." – The last part doesn't make sense. Beria was appointed in August 1945. By then, neither the Uranium Club nor the Reich existed, and it would take years for Germany to regain enough resources to even think about a nuclear program. Hexmaster.se (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Infiltration of the German program

message: User:Kl833x9 added some interesting information about the Soviet effort to mine uranium (see here). My only real problem with it is that for his references he cited 1. his own experiences and 2. an apparently all-Russian source. The first falls under original research and the second is not confirmable by people who don't speak Russian (i.e., most people on the English Wikipedia). 
If the facts could be confirmed in an English-language source of any repute, I'd be happy with their inclusion. I believe Alexei Kojevnikov's latest book (cited here) talks about this issue in particular though I don't have a copy on hand at the moment. Hopefully this is not too pedantic. --Fastfission 20:51, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A few other issues: As I understand it, while the Soviets did try to get material from East German mines, the mines themselves were not very fruitful. I am not sure they actually contributed much to the Soviet effort. Also, the difficulties uranium miners faced in general were not limited to the Soviet program, but in fact plagued every uranium mining operating until relatively recently (not because it was a radioactive environment, but because uranium mines are filled with radon gas, a known carcinogen) and it is rarely cost-efficient to properly ventilate them (I believe France gets around this by mostly using open-pit mining). --Fastfission 20:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Uranium logistics

message: what the heck this page dosent do anything it is horrible where is the information? i'm tritng to do a report but this doesn't give me any help
*At the very least, it links to a number of online resources and has a number of print resources listed. --Fastfission 01:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why? 

message: Tsar Bomba - "The explosion was hot enough to induce third degree burns at 100 km."
This doesn't seem to be realistic...  Anyone have a citation?
:On the contrary, VERY realistic. 50 Mt bomb after all.
::Quoting Carey Sublette at nuclear archive, "The Tu-95 was painted with a special white reflective paint to protect it from the thermal radiation of the fireball. The airborne laboratory plane was also covered with the same paint. In clear air, the 50 Mt test was capable in principle of inflicting third degree burns at a distance of up to 100 km."  It appears then to be a computed rather than an experienced statement.  SkoreKeep (talk) 11:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tsar Bomba - 3rd degree burns at 100km 

message: Has anyone else noticed that the first picture of "Andrei Sakharov (left) with Igor Kurchatov (right)" dosen't work? James.Denholm 05:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh?  It appears that it's at rest, on a park bench.  Is your statement relevant? SkoreKeep (talk) 11:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture problems 

message: "The area is still radioactive (as of 2006)."
This is a meaningless statement.  All areas are radioactive.  The importance is the relative radioactivity of the area, not that it is radioactive in and of itself.  An actual measurement or measurements of the level of radioactivity at Chagan should be be listed. - MSTCrow 19:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chagan 

message: The single most damaging incident took place at the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant Mayak in 1957 and is considered to be the largest release of radioactivy by accident, several times more severe than the Chernobyl disaster.
Yet International_Nuclear_Events_Scale#Level_7Lists Chernobyl as level 7 while Mayak is level 6. Also, the Mayak article states This nuclear accident, the Soviet Union's worst other than the Chernobyl disaster,[...]
If it is not a contradiction, Someone knowledgeable should clarify the terminology.
70.80.113.243 05:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction about Mayak? 

message: :Image:Tsarbomb.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Tsarbomb.jpg

message: :Image:Andrei Sakharov and Igor Kurchatov.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Andrei Sakharov and Igor Kurchatov.jpeg

message: I'd like to save the image, and at the time I uploaded it, I did it in good faith the image was PD -- pre-1973 Soviet
photo.  Now it appears this has changed.  Can the image be saved by, say, lowering the image quality (or some other
rationale)?  That's the only way I see right off.
dino (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes on [[:Image:Andrei Sakharov and Igor Kurchatov.jpeg]]

message: The first paragraph under the Nuclear Physics in the Soviet Union section contains the sentence:
But such surveys were never made, as it was discovered that the main motivation for uranium ores at the time—radium, which had scientific as well as medical uses—could be retrieved from borehole water from the Ukhta oilfields.
Clarifying:
… it was discovered that the main motivation for uranium ores at the time … could be retrieved from borehole water…
This sentence seems to suggest that the Russians turned water into motivation. If we can convert electricity to religion, maybe the Russians can convert water to motivation. (I find the absurdity of these conversions humorous.) This needs clarification. Ian01 (talk) 22:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water-to-motivation conversion? 

message: Hi all. IMHO, this article looks very interesting and coherently written. However I was unable to find adequate inline citations for most of the text. I'll add relevant tagging, to help provide the citations. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 04:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added quite a bit of information about the testing of various bombs (RDS-2 3,4,5 9).  A very good source of detailed technical information can be found (in Russian) in Andryushin's article "Taming of the Nucleus: Creation of the first models of nuclear weapons". DonPMitchell (talk) 05:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References, sources, citations? 

message: Wasn't the technological advancements made by the german scientists who were captured by the russians towards the end of WW2 the ultimate reason why the russians became capable of making nuclear weapons? How important was their contribution to Russia's development of nuclear weapons?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.99.132.30 (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never read any account of German scientists being involved.  The Soviets did use Germans extensively for the development of the R-1 rocket (a copy of the V-2), but since the Germans never made much progress with atomic energy, there would't have been much point in taking the security risk of involving them. DonPMitchell (talk) 05:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance of the captured german scientists? 

message: I see there is many "Atomic this or atomic that" phrases used in this (and similar). While normally it is incorrect to refer to any of the nuclear weapons or reactions as "atomic", I do understand there are historical reasons to use that term where appropriate. However, I guess it might be overused, and there are contexts where it would be better replaced by "nuclear" which is more correct. Since I do not live in an English speaking country, I won't be changing any of that, but someone coming from such a culture could take a look and decide where would each of these terms be better suited... Arny (talk) 07:54, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atomic Teminology 

message: An image used in this article, File:Rsd 37 nuclear test.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 9 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:45, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Rsd 37 nuclear test.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: The caption for :File:Soviet super test.jpg in  says "The mushroom cloud from the first air-dropped bomb test in 1951. This picture is confused with RDS-27 and RDS-37 tests." So is this image actually RDS-27 or RDS-37? DMacks (talk) 19:09, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which test is in the photograph? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Under the 'World War II and accelerated feasibility' section, the following sentence is slightly confusing: 'Russia became engaged in a bloody conflict along the Eastern Front'. 
We in the west call it the 'Eastern Front', but relative to Russia, the war was to their west. 
As Russia is the subject in the sentence, perhaps there's a better way to word this as it might confuse those with less knowledge of geography. JJM0070 (talk) 01:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern vs Western 

message: This revert . What is the relevance of Thermobaric weapons and Russian invasion of Ukraine to this page? My very best wishes (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Unrelated

message: Where is he? Chic McGregor (talk) 19:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oleg Lavrentiev 

message: Did it really have something to do with the subject of the article? Grassynoel (talk) 00:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chernobyl