| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
| | :Never mind - I figured it out via the Wikitext Cheatsheet! Putting 5 single quotes around the text did it! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 02:20, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | | :Never mind - I figured it out via the Wikitext Cheatsheet! Putting 5 single quotes around the text did it! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 02:20, 15 June 2019 (UTC) |
| | :: I completely agree those words are both, and I feel I can say so with utmost certainty. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC) | | :: I completely agree those words are both, and I feel I can say so with utmost certainty. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC) |
| − | :::I appreciate the feedback. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 13:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | If you’re going to watch the series, be sure to read this so you’ll know which parts are total BS: https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/what-hbos-chernobyl-got-right-and-what-it-got-terribly-wrong [[User:Tualha|Tualha]] ([[User talk:Tualha|talk]]) 08:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Well, there's a really short and simple explanation: "The reactor was a shit design." :P The exact circumstances aren't even that important, since it could just as easily have gone wrong in a variety of different ways. (To quote a 1993 report from a Soviet committee, translated by IAEA, "''The Commission considers that the negative properties of this type of reactor are likely to predetermine the inevitability of emergency situations.''") [[User:Zmatt|Zmatt]] ([[User talk:Zmatt|talk]]) 08:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − | : It '''was''' a shitty design - but operational errors were crucial to the disaster. There are many big machines and installations that are very dangerous if put outside of their normal operating envelopes, and designing them to be failsafe in face of operational blunders is often very hard. Airliners stall, power turbines enter resonant states, boilers bust etc. - when operated incompetently. -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 18:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I thought White Hat understood 'banging the rocks together to hard' to mean 'created to big a fire.' [[Special:Contributions/172.68.59.90|172.68.59.90]] 19:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − | :Added alternative explanation with this meaning -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 14:38, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | What I like about ''this'' page is that it's an explanation of an explanation...[[User:John.Adriaan|John.Adriaan]] ([[User talk:John.Adriaan|talk]]) 02:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | An explanation for Beret might have to be a little more literary. "The Soviets told no tale; but even as uranium was the foundation of their might, so also was it their destruction: they banged too hard and too greedily, and disturbed that from which they fled, the Curie's Bane."
| |
| − |
| |
| − | /Ponytails/Ponytail/[[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.34|162.158.214.34]] 10:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The explanation of the title text mentions unmuting a sound system, but initiating an emergency shutdown is more like '''muting''' a sound system. That would make the analogy more precise—muting a sound system often causes a crack sound, proportional to the set volume, Turning up the volume causes offsets somewhere in the system. At switching off, these offsets rapidly go away, causing a sound. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.89.31|162.158.89.31]] 14:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
| |
