Talk:Stanislav Petrov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"questions over the part Petrov's decision"[edit]

It is universally agreed by all sources that Petrov's second-guessing of the (ancient) computer saved humanity its worst possible scenario; whoever wrote this is interjecting negativity for unknown reasons, (possibly secondary gain, or perhaps bias towards what survives of the hated apparat). Likewise, Petrov may assert he was not punished (to prevent punishment by aforementioned aparat) but he was--his career was destroyed and he was forced to live on a meager Soviet pension.

Needs cleaned ASAP. --John Bessa (talk) 12:58, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

New revelation[edit]

It is my belief that it was Carney's/Karney's information which Petrov had received, although he would not have been aware from which individual that information originated which reached him through the system. I just read the review to a book and since the time mentioned is also fall 1983 (like September) it seems very likely that we are talking of the same event. The Russian got a Peace Prize, the American got prison. Ally Hauptmann-Gurski (talk) 05:22, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Able Archer incident =[edit]

'November 1983 by the US and its Nato allies was so realistic it made the Russians believe that a nuclear strike on its territory was a real possibility.'

Were these two incidents related or not? I get a feeling nuclear disaster was some sort of 1983 zeitgeist, — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:47, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Missile or missiles?[edit]

The introduction states that it was a missile. The "incident" section says missiles, plural. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grumpyoldgeek (talkcontribs) 00:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

References to Petrov and the incident in War! What is it Good For?[edit]

I agree with User:Motiard. This section goes off topic and smacks of promotion of someone else's ideas. Let's keep this biographical article about Petrov. Rklawton (talk) 00:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you User:Rklawton for starting this and for backing me up (if that's the right way to put it), I'm brand new to (editing) Wikipedia and wasn't sure how to start a discussion on the Talk page (and took me a while to realise how to reply here). You pretty much said it better and more succinctly than I could (as I am now demonstrating).
Maybe being a new user who made an edit threw up a red flag, but I'm not attacking the book, which seems to have good reviews, or the editor who wrote the text, who is probably just a fan of the book, I just like Wikipedia pages to be 'clean' and to the point and when reading this page thought that section seemed, as the consensus page puts it, "irrelevant and distracting".
What's the procedure regarding consensus? I'm not even sure if User:TypingInTheSky objects to my edit, or just thinks I should have posted here first. --Motiard (talk) 01:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Good questions, and Welcome! I think you've stated your case well. Let's let this sit for at least a few days so other editors can join in below and share their opinions. We can then see where it goes from there. As you seem to be aware, this isn't about "winning" or "losing" but about continually improving our articles. You actually need do nothing more! Editors following this discussion will sort out consensus and make any changes the group deems appropriate. Indeed, the process works best if you hang out and watch. Of course, if you think of any new reasons why this section shouldn't be included, please feel free to add those, too! Also, if you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. It's great to see new editors take an interest, and this article is certainly intriguing! Rklawton (talk) 02:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply and the welcome. Yeah, I don't mind just watching and waiting; I've only ever read articles before, so it's interesting to learn and see how Wikipedia works. Cheers. --Motiard (talk) 03:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
I've belatedly just wandered by this article, months later, and cut the section as obviously inappropriate before noticing this talk page thread. The "getting to Petrov" idea is a nice theory, but unless the phrase has been widely adopted, it doesn't belong in his biography. --McGeddon (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Born in Odessa[edit]

In this personal interview he clearly states to be born near Vladivostok on outskirts of the USSR. (talk) 02:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)