Talk:Nuclear close calls

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

tone here[edit]

is hot garbage — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.75.25.158 (talk) 19:26, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to). 108.35.59.228 (talk) 11:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One more that I've heard of[edit]

The story may be a fake, but that's how I heard it.

Apparently the u.s. once almost started the war. Back then (probably no later than the 50s) when most bombs were still carried by planes. One such airforce base did not have an air traffic control tower and thus no way to communicate with aircraft once they were sent on their way. One night a guard heard some strange activity at a fence and mis-identified this as possible Soviet special forces trying to enter the base. He telephoned another part of the base from where the aircraft crews were ordered to their planes and to take off. The guard then investigated the fence and found it to be a bear. He called back, but the aircraft were already starting their engines. Then someone drove a Jeep on the runway with the headlights towards the planes, to block the runway. This stopped the incident. Later it was determined that the guards had only recently been warned of the possibility of some special forces maybe trying to sneak into the base. As a result, all low-end bases were upgraded with flight-control towers.

GMRE (talk) 19:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited change by IP who has inserted false info elsewhere[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_nuclear_close_calls&diff=prev&oldid=759618038. I leave it to those working on this article to work out whether this is based on anything (it has stood here over a year). I just reverted a totally bogus edit by this same IP at Jack Block Park. - Jmabel | Talk 06:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 2021-09-25T00:18:07 user:115.166.25.16 inserted "[sic]" between "24" and "megaton", claiming, "24 January 1961: 24 megaton is in the source but is wrong."

If anyone knows that any source that's wrong, let's discuss. In the meantime, I've reverted that edit. DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:21, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Putin and 'special alert'[edit]

As widely reported in the news a few days ago, Putin claimed to have put Russia's nuclear forces on 'special alert'. My view is that this is not suitable for inclusion on this page, for two reasons:

Common to many entries of this list is that genuine readiness was made for nuclear war (bombers scrambled, missiles ready to fire etc.). In my view, Putin's claim doesn't seem to convey this; it just seems like rhetoric designed to warn the West to back off. Rhetoric like this has been used before (mostly during the Cold War) and doesn't merit an entry in this list.
This is related to a current event, and thus this situation is yet to fully play out. Furthermore, inclusion of this would be an example of recency bias.

I'm interested to hear arguments to the contrary, I've realised in thinking about this that it might be suitable for inclusion, I'm just erring on the side of not including it. @Morgankarki: since we've been engaged in a little reverting, what say you? — JThistle38 (talk) 23:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not a close call, and no one has been able to say what 'special alert' means. The lead here says "an incident that could have led to at least one unintended nuclear detonation or explosion" -- if russia launched a nuke right now it would not be unintended. And like you said this is an on going incident. There is zero evidence anyone has been close to pushing the button Strangerpete (talk) 00:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Morgankarki, Jthistle38, and Strangerpete: I might support inclusion, but people who think it belongs here should provide at least one reference and explain, at least in the note -- and first here -- why they think it belongs. DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:43, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kixean777: The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has been added to and deleted from this article several times recently. Please (a) discuss here why you think it belongs, (b) including relevant references. I reverted your addition for these reasons. Thanks for your support of Wikipedia. DavidMCEddy (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it yet qualifies for inclusion. The closest I can see was probably the discussion among Russian commanders about use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine which took place in November 2022. I don't think it qualifies unless a later source indicates that a strike was actively considered during that meeting, otherwise it's just more of the continued debate about nuclear doctrine. As with many of the Cold War close-calls, I suspect we won't have the full details until years after this conflict ends. --ERAGON (talk) 08:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are reactor near-misses allowed?[edit]

Is it okay to put near-misses where a nuclear reactor nearly failed, or is it for Nuclear weapons only? I think yes, and am putting in the 2022 bombing of Zaporizhzhia fire, but if not then feel free to undo my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SqueakSquawk4 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence in this article says, "A nuclear close call is an incident that could have led to at least one unintended nuclear detonation or explosion." A reactor melt down would NOT be considered a "nuclear detonation or explosion", I think. DavidMCEddy (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would partially consider it to count (e.g. chernobyl had a large explosion as part of the meltdown), but I accept your point. Do you know of a page for near-misses for meltdwons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SqueakSquawk4 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]