Talk:Operation Sunbeam

Yield

The german version of this page mentions much lower yield (20 tons instead of <20 kt). Could anyone correct the inaccurate data? --RMeier (talk) 07:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Also W54 gives it as 18t and 22t respectively, so it's definitely wrong here. --87.187.195.187 (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. SkoreKeep (talk) 06:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, almost done. I edited the infobox to indicate that all the yields except for Small Boy were in the tons range, but someone by the name of Subash.chandran007 reverted the change within seconds "because it didn’t appear constructive to me" (message sent to my talk page). While it is more wordy to explain what the yields were, reverting to "< 20 kT" when the largest was 1.65 kT and the rest in the tons range seems perverse. Sorry, I'm going to want a better reason than your feelings, Mr Chandran. SkoreKeep (talk) 02:46, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Location

The location given at the top right of the page is incorrect. Three of the Sunbeam shots were in Area 18, and the largest on Doomtown in Area 5. The location given for the series is in Area 2; I thought it was maybe some "average" but that isn't even true, so I have no idea what the location given means. My locations for the shots are:

Little Feller II 37.11906,-116.30381

Johnny Boy 37.12216,-116.33395

Small Boy 36.798,-115.932

Little Feller I 37.11,-116.31 (probably rough)

                 (no, corrected coordinates of LFI are 37.10946,-116.31823, not rough).

Added coordinates to the shot table. SkoreKeep (talk) 06:13, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

The table on this page is generated by database

The table on this page and the contents of any nuclear tests infobox are generated from a database of nuclear testing which I have maintained and researched for a number of years. The table is automatically generated from that database by a Visual Basic script, and then has, periodically, been inserted into the page manually. I began doing this in October of 2013.

Recently a user complained (politely) to me about the practice. It seems to him that it removes control from all editors besides myself over the content. He believes it is tantamount to WP:OWNED of the pages affected. He also points out that there is no public mention of the fact anywhere on wikipedia, and that is true, through my own oversight, until now.

There was no intent that the pages affected should be owned by myself; in fact, one of my reasons for building these pages was to solicit (in the wikipedia way) criticism and corrections to the data, perhaps additional references that I had been unable to locate. I have regenerated the tables twice in the days since they were originally placed. Each time I did so, I performed a diff between the current version and the version that I put up in the previous cycle; all corrections were then either entered into the database or corrected in the programming, as appropriate. As may be guessed, the programming corrections were frequent to start out as suggestions about the table formatting were raised, and most incorporated. I have not made judgements on the "usefulness" of corrections; all have been incorporated, or I have communicated directly with the editor to settle the matter. In fact it was in pursuing such a correction that this matter came up.

I am posting this comment on the Talk page of every page containing content which is so generated. If you would like to comment on this matter, please go to the copy on Talk:List of nuclear tests so the discussion can be kept together. I will also be placing a maintained template on each Talk page (if anyone would like also to be named as a maintainer on one or all pages, you are welcome). I solicit all comments and suggestions.

SkoreKeep (talk) 04:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Operation Sunbeam. 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/20131029194805/http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_02019401a_121.pdf to http://docs.nrdc.org/nuclear/files/nuc_02019401a_121.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012160826/http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf to http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103041622/http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_317.pdf to http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_317.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:28, 25 January 2018 (UTC)