Talk:Chernobyl disaster

Grammar

The fist sentence should read: "At the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the city of Pripyat, located in the then Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union (USSR)" instead of: "at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the city of Pripyat, then located in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union (USSR)". It did not physically move.

The section titled "Social Economic Effects" should be renamed to "socioeconomic effects" to reflect proper terminology.

minor but this is the English language page "Numerous structural and construction quality issues, as well as deviations from the original plant design, had been known to KGB since at least 1973 and passed on to the Central Committee, which take no action and classified the information." should be "been known to the KGB... which took no action"

Containing fire

The timeline says all fires were contained at 6:35 - this should probably mention "fires around the power plant": The core continued to burn days after, but there is no description what measures really lead to containing the fire inside the reactor. It just says "It is now known that virtually none of the neutron absorbers reached the core." It is not clear what really stopped the fire.

decay heat was the "fire" and it "stopped" being "red hot" like decay heat always does. With time.

Grammar edit request

There's a rather extended high-comma-count "sentence" with what looks to be a misspelling.

The expected highest body activity was in the first few years, were the unabated ingestion of local food, primarily milk consumption, resulted in the transfer of activity from soil to body, after the dissolution of the USSR, the now reduced scale initiative to monitor the human body activity in these regions of Ukraine, recorded a small and gradual half-decadal-long rise, in internal committed dose, before returning to the previous trend of observing ever lower body counts each year.

minimal-change improvement:

The expected highest body activity was in the first few years, where the unabated ingestion of local food (primarily milk) resulted in the transfer of activity from soil to body. After the dissolution of the USSR, the now reduced scale initiative to monitor the human body activity in these regions of Ukraine recorded a small and gradual half-decadal-long rise in internal committed dose before returning to the previous trend of observing ever lower body counts each year.

length of lead

This has come up before, see..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chernobyl_disaster/Archive_13#Lead_too_long

Dougsim

Alexey v. Alexy v. Alexei

The third paragraph under Core meltdown risk mitigation introduces Alexei Ananenko. However, the next paragraph refers to him as "Alexy" Ananenko. Then, citation 80 says its "Alexey." Should they be changed for consistency? ~tayanaru (talk) 21:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I would vote for AlexeiSredmash (talk) 23:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Recent sources on his own article refer to him as Oleksiy, why not use that name instead? Reconrabbit 00:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

thats a good idea ~tayanaru (talk) 21:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Amazing writing 64.185.43.184 (talk) 03:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Splitting proposal - investigations

Given the size of this article and the difficulty in effectively merging the "effects" section into that article, which has its own issues, I propose that the "investigations sections" be split off into their own article, similar to Investigations into the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Reconrabbit 19:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support not sure if you're still interested in doing the split yourself @Reconrabbit: but if you are, I'd recommend just doing the split now without waiting for additional comments here. Cheers, Dan the Animator 05:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  I'll take action on it then. Reconrabbit 05:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Done: Investigations into the Chernobyl disaster I've never done a split before but this one was pretty clean. Let me know if I screwed anything up. Worth noting that this article is now at 18,000 words - we're getting there but it's still huge. Reconrabbit 18:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for doing the split, it look perfect! :) Great job with writing the lead for the new article too! My only suggestion would be, if possible, to split additional content from the article (not necessarily to the investigations article but in general) given it still is well above the recommended 9,000-10,000 readable prose word limit. That said, I'm not an expert on the subject matter but after taking a cursory look through the article, I think it might be advisable to split off most of the content under the Human impact section (especially the Abortions and Cancer assessments parts, which are disproportionately long in comparison to the other subsections). Dan the Animator 21:33, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Also thought I'd put this out there but I'd be happy to help bring this article through WP:GAN if you want. Cheers, Dan the Animator 21:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for the offer. I believe all that needs to be done to bring the word count down is to move more of the "effects" into Effects of the Chernobyl disaster, which is weirdly divided between these articles. I'm not intimately familiar with the text right now, but by the time I'm finished with that I probably will be ready for a nomination. Reconrabbit 22:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  Sounds good and agree with merging content into the Effects article. No rush with editing the article and feel free to nominate whenever you're ready. When you do nominate it though, make sure to ping/message me if you want me as the reviewer since I'll probably forget about this in the meantime. In any case, thanks for taking the time to work on this article! :) Dan the Animator 00:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Famous persons associated with the liquidators of the Chernobyl disaster

Good day to you all and to you personally!!!!!!

So,exactly how it was removed from the article on the English version of the Wikipedia website,but still,I think that it will be interesting to someone,let it be in the discussion of this article-so,well,please,at least in the discussion,don’t delete!!!!!!

This is all taken from the same article,but from the Ukrainian version of the Wikipedia website and translated in the Google Translate Internet service!!!!!!

• Ukrainian poet Yuriy Izdryk worked as a liquidator of the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster since the end of May 1986 year .At least some mention: .
• The father of Wladimir Klitschko ( Boxing ) and Vitali Klitschko ( Boxing and Mayor of Kyiv , Ukraine in 2014 year –present , etc. ,etc.), Klitschko Volodymyr Rodionovych, participated in overcoming the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster.At least some mention:
• The father Oleksandr of the vocalist of the Ukrainian electro-folk band "ONUKA" Nataliya Zhyzhchenko was one of the liquidators of the consequences of the tragedy at the nuclear power plant.At least some mention: .

Nokil83a (talk) 15:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

So out of the three people there is one actual notable person, a poet. The other two are fathers of other people. No reason for inclusion. And for a third time, there is no need to link to common words. Or using six exclamation marks!!!!!! soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 19:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2024

Remove entirely: Such psychological distresses can also significantly increase cancer mortality rates, possibly as much as 97%, nearly double,[170] resulting in as many as ~100,000 additional cancer mortalities among the liquidators. From this accident, the fear of radiological illness has been more of a detriment, and potentially more lethal, upon the lives of affected people than the illnesses themselves and, unlike radioactive contaminants, shows no signs of diminishing in the near future.[165]

Reason: The source study finds an *association* between psychological distress and increased cancer mortality *among people with a history of cancer*. This is a correlation and is certainly not causal. Among those with a history of cancer, correlation between stress and mortality is almost certainly a result of the sicker patients being more psychologically stressed. It is no way suggests that that stress causes increased chances of death; in fact, the opposite is surely the reason. "Stress causes a 97% increase in the changes of dying from cancer" does not pass the smell test and is not stated in the source article. The statement "fear of radiological illness has been more of a detriment, and potentially more lethal, upon the lives of affected people than the illnesses themselves" is completely unsupported and is based on quite obviously faulty logical reasoning. Ngibian (talk) 20:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Done - This was clear original research and has been removed. Jamedeus (talk) 07:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Thickness of Test Metals Around the Reactor, ratio per Mass Uranium..

Heat and at 30 gigaWatts....South Korean Nuclear Electric Plant 103.224.94.4 (talk) 04:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

There is currently no source for the assertion that the room was calm when AZ-5 was pressed or that the use of AZ-5 was pre-planned, other than Dyatlov's book.

I [made a change https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Chernobyl_disaster&diff=prev&oldid=1219563042] to clarify that the current source - Dyatlov's book - is only an assertion from him about the use of AZ-5. My edit was reverted (actually, it wasn't merely reverted, but the language strengthened despite no new sources added).

If we are only going to use Dyatlov's book, that's fine, but the article needs to reflect that. If there are other sources for these claims, then they need to be added. 47.197.90.87 (talk) RadicalHarmony (talk) 01:33, 19 April 2024 (UTC)