Talk:Koeberg Nuclear Power Station

message: Hi, I see the article has been rehashed and the content relating to suspected sabotage has been deleted. I am pleased the local Police Station has been removed as an indication of the location of Koeberg.
Under recent developments we must go back to the list of developments that brought us to where we are now..
Regards Gregorydavid 11:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suspected sabotage

message: I see nothing wrong with this reference - are you saying it didn't happen ? Wizzy…☎ 11:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ANC refs

message: What about SAFARI-1?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.134.166.10 (talk) 09:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: SAFARI-1 isn't a power station, it's just a research reactor. 146.232.50.216 (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Koeberg the only nuclear power station in SA as stated at the beginning of this article? 

message: That fact that "current anti-nuclear campaigns against Koeberg are being run by Earthlife Africa and Koeberg Alert" is not sufficiently noteworthy to be mentioned in the introduction. The antinuclear lobby in SA is very small.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protests 

message: Should Koeberg Nuclear Power Station be renamed as Koeberg nuclear power plant?
Power plants in the US are called "power plants", but power stations in the UK and elsewhere are called "power stations". Per WP:ENGVAR, WP does not pursue "consistency" across naming issue like this and it does favour use of the locally-appropriate name.
My interpretation in South African convention is that Koeberg is a power station which has two power plants.  Each power plant includes a reactor.
Eskom the owner and operator refers to Koeberg Power Station.  The South African government also refers to Koeberg as a power station.
This has two now been renamed as "power plant", despite lack of prior discussion and also after being reverted, contrary to WP:BRD. I invite  to make some case for the renaming to "power plant". Andynct (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Nuclear power plant and List of nuclear reactors, the number of occurrences for this appellation is very clear. Trackteur (talk) 11:58, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The discussion and decision on Nuclear power plant page was relevant only to that page and is irrelevant to this page as it takes no account of regional English language variations and usage where this power station is sited.  Koeberg in all documentation in South Africa is referred to as a "power station" Andynct (talk) 12:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You have checked the number of occurrences of this page List of nuclear reactors, it's a generic term that applies not only to South Africa. Trackteur (talk) 13:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Irrelevant.  What's relevant to this page is what it is called officially on signs, documents and in the press in South Africa.  It is called the "Koeberg Nuclear Power Station"  Its name should not have been changed without prior discussion and should be changed back to its official name Koeberg Nuclear Power Station.       Andynct (talk) 18:54, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

text: In light of what happened on the Chapelcross article I would also like to specifically point out this instruction from WP:RMUM: Move wars are disruptive, so if you make a bold move and it is reverted, do not make the move again. Instead, follow the procedures laid out in § Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. - htonl (talk) 20:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

text: It's referred to as Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, so that's its name. Pointing to other power stations with alternative naming conventions is not persuasive. Greenman (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Koeberg Nuclear Power Station. 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/20071023045318/http://www.eskom.co.za/content/GFS%200034%20Nuclear%20Energy%20Basic%20Cycle%20Rev%203~1.doc to http://www.eskom.co.za/content/GFS%200034%20Nuclear%20Energy%20Basic%20Cycle%20Rev%203~1.doc
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/mk/mk-history.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) 09:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Koeberg Nuclear Power Station. 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://archive.is/20070706050919/http://www.iol.za.org/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=ct20020825220912872G651975 to http://www.iol.za.org/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=ct20020825220912872G651975
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005215153/http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=173 to http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=173
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051016124540/http://inro.ca/en/pres_pap/asian/asi00/EMME2Asian.pdf to http://www.inro.ca/en/pres_pap/asian/asi00/EMME2Asian.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005211549/http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=441 to http://www.eskom.co.za/live/content.php?Item_ID=441
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) 21:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified