Jump to content

Talk:Nuclear weapon: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Reverted New topic
Undid revision 1112897679 by 122.53.185.84 (talk) not related to improving the article
Line 95: Line 95:


If I have misunderstood the difference between ''strategic'' and ''tactical'', then swap out those terms. In any case, the revised sentence seems less ambiguous than the original. [[Special:Contributions/194.25.174.98|194.25.174.98]] ([[User talk:194.25.174.98|talk]]) 07:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
If I have misunderstood the difference between ''strategic'' and ''tactical'', then swap out those terms. In any case, the revised sentence seems less ambiguous than the original. [[Special:Contributions/194.25.174.98|194.25.174.98]] ([[User talk:194.25.174.98|talk]]) 07:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

== Nuclear and Atomic, Energy ==

Atomic is the word from Atom Elements as relayed to DAISU, Atomic intervention its parts like Proton, Nucleus and Electron, so therefore Atomic is the word derived from its parts, and Nuclear is derived from the word Nucleus and its Parts. Nuclear are Nucleus intervention or energy found in Nucleus of an Atom, part like the electronics Lambda and the Data or Bits core of Nucleus. [[Special:Contributions/122.53.185.84|122.53.185.84]] ([[User talk:122.53.185.84|talk]]) 17:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:42, 28 September 2022

Template:Vital article

Former featured articleNuclear weapon is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 13, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2004Refreshing brilliant proseKept
May 26, 2005Featured article reviewKept
April 29, 2006Featured topic candidateNot promoted
May 2, 2007Featured article reviewDemoted
July 15, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
June 13, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Former featured article


Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2019 and 18 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jleavitt07.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lesotelo1218 (article contribs).

SI units

It would be good if at least some of the energies quoted were in joules. 86.129.195.92 (talk) 22:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all energies in this article are already followed by conversions to J, GJ, TJ or PJ. Fbergo (talk) 00:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: War and the Environment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 May 2022 and 6 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JKendraB (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jmack2214.

— Assignment last updated by Karanaconda (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

German

Put IT in German 195.8.226.76 (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see de:Kernwaffe. VQuakr (talk) 18:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed change for clarity

Currently, the text includes,

most of these are for non-strategic (decisively war-winning) purposes

As there is ambiguity whether the parenthetical definition applies to "strategic" or "non-strategic", I would change this to state,

most of these are not for strategic (decisively war-winning) purposes

If I have misunderstood the difference between strategic and tactical, then swap out those terms. In any case, the revised sentence seems less ambiguous than the original. 194.25.174.98 (talk) 07:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]