Talk:Severomorsk Disaster: Difference between revisions
→Aftermath section: new section |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
: I have removed this section. It was totally irrelevant to the disaster and I'm fully unaware of any serious religious organization establishing any kind of relationship, starting with the Catholic Church itself. [[User:MaeseLeon|MaeseLeon]] ([[User talk:MaeseLeon|talk]]) 07:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC) |
: I have removed this section. It was totally irrelevant to the disaster and I'm fully unaware of any serious religious organization establishing any kind of relationship, starting with the Catholic Church itself. [[User:MaeseLeon|MaeseLeon]] ([[User talk:MaeseLeon|talk]]) 07:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
== Aftermath section == |
|||
With all respect to the author of the ref'd book - just how were these nuclear weapons supposed to explode? Modern weapons have all sorts of safeguards to prevent them from firing - either from being exposed to fire, or dropped from a 60-story building. Also, they would have to have been armed in the first place - which, as anyone who has handled them (from either the West or the RF or China), that doesn't happen unless they are about to be used. '''SO''' - while interesting as a 'fantasy,' the practical reality is, there is no way they could have detonated ... |
|||
Revision as of 22:26, 24 May 2020
 | Military history: Russian & Soviet B‑class | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Russia: Military B‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
.svg)
The prophecy of Fátima doesn't fit here
I'm a bit confused why "The prophecy of Fátima" is a section in this article. While some Catholics believe in both the Fatima apparitions and the possible connection between the alleged prophecies and the Severomorsk Disaster, I don't see how it could rise to the level of belonging in a neutral, objective encyclopedia. The Catholic Church does not endorse the viewpoint. The Catholic Church does not even consider the alleged Fatima prophecies to be official Catholic dogma; it merely considers the Fatima apparition claims to be "worthy of belief." I think the only way this section meets the notability requirements for this article is either (1) if an established religion made some official dogmatic claim that the Severomorsk Disaster was part of some religious interpretation of dogma, or (2) if the alleged prophecy had specifically mentioned a Soviet naval base suffering an accident. Short of either of those possibilities, I don't see how this section can be reasonably linked to the article. While I certainly mean no disrespect to the people who believe that the Severomorsk Disaster is related to the Fatima prophecies, I believe this section does not belong on Wikipedia and should be removed. Et0048 (talk) 02:26, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I have removed this section. It was totally irrelevant to the disaster and I'm fully unaware of any serious religious organization establishing any kind of relationship, starting with the Catholic Church itself. MaeseLeon (talk) 07:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Aftermath section
With all respect to the author of the ref'd book - just how were these nuclear weapons supposed to explode? Modern weapons have all sorts of safeguards to prevent them from firing - either from being exposed to fire, or dropped from a 60-story building. Also, they would have to have been armed in the first place - which, as anyone who has handled them (from either the West or the RF or China), that doesn't happen unless they are about to be used. SO - while interesting as a 'fantasy,' the practical reality is, there is no way they could have detonated ...