Talk:Hinkley Point A nuclear power station

Somerset Mid‑importance

	Somerset portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge?[edit]

Would it not make sense to merge the hinkley point A, B and C articles into one, to make a much more substancial article? Fintan264 (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would be appropriate to merge them as, although they are at the same geographic location, they represent very different time periods in nuclear development, use different technologies and are at very different stages in their lifecycle.— Rod ^talk 17:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Rod. Different stations, different technologies, different timelines. --TimTay (talk) 18:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, me too. Too different, leave as is. Rwendland (talk) 01:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they do cover different periods of nuclear technology, and are at different stages in their existence, but merging into one article would help to simplify finding information on the stations, and through having them gathered in one place could possibly help compare the different types of technology. Hinkley Point is one of only two power stations on Wikipedia that I know have been written about in this way, the others being the Hunterston A and B power stations. All others are written about in one article per site. Take Littlebrook Power Station for example. Not two, but four stations have been built on that site over the past 70 years, using not one, but two types of fuel over that period. You may argue that the A, B and C stations have little written about them on this particular article, but that is clearly because no one has taken the time to write about them. With Hinkley Point A, B and C each having been written about separately, a fair bit of information has built up, and a merge would create a substancial, definitive article on the past, present and future of the Hinkley Point site. Fintan264 (talk) 01:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be agreement about this so can we remove the merge tags - unless anyone else wants to contribute to the debate?— Rod ^talk 22:12, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge tag removed.— Rod ^talk 18:33, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Catastrophic" steam turbine failure in 1969?[edit]

In the Museum of Retrotech http://douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/POWER/oddfluid/oddfluid.htm#rub I found a link to a report about a steam turbine failure in 1969: http://pme.sagepub.com/content/186/1/341 2003:45:5950:BADA:F5C5:5735:2F7D:7CF8 (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 October 2020[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Berkeley Nuclear Power Station which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]