Talk:2017 North Korean nuclear test

A news item involving 2017 North Korean nuclear test was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 4 September 2017.

Wikipedia

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 3, 2023 and September 3, 2024.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Japan Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 14:40, November 10, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Korea Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated working groups:
/
	This article is supported by the Korean military history task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.
	This article is supported by one or more inactive working groups.

Military history: Asian / Korean

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Korean military history task force

Magnitude 6.3 is much larger than 100 kTon.

According to Moment_magnitude_scale#Nuclear_explosions a 1 kiloton blast corresponds to a seismic magnitude 4.0. Since each magnitude is a factor of 31 in energy, the reported mag of 6.3 would correspond to a 2800 kTon blast, which is larger than any reports. Can anyone find a source resolving this discrepancy? Spiel496 (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the next couple of days official scientific measurements will be all over the news media. We can wait. HammerFilmFan (talk) 05:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

True, but at least put a caveat in the meantime.Lihaas (talk) 12:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Collective news coverage and references

RT: Assange: Constant US threats against N. Korea have put it on total war footing

Anyone is welcome to add more. 2001:2003:54FA:2751:0:0:0:1 (talk) 02:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Russia Today is a government-run/funded organ for the Putin regime, and is not considered to be a Reliable Source. HammerFilmFan (talk) 05:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is utter BS because BBC "is a government-run/funded organ for the [May] regime, and is not considered to be a Reliable Source." (a la Iraq WMD's) (likewise NYT, including Venecuela coup 15 years ago)

France 24 "is a government-run/funded organ for the [Macron] regime, and is not considered to be a Reliable Source. "

NPR "is a government-run/funded organ for the [Trump] regime, and is not considered to be a Reliable Source. "

That's right, you cannot have you cake and eat it too.Lihaas (talk) 12:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Wikipedia has widely held that 'Russia Today' is not a RS - it is frequently used as a propaganda organ for the Putin regime, rather than an objective news source. The other sources you cite are considered a reliable source - by the way, if you think NPR is on Trump's side, you need to look deeper at that station. :-) HammerFilmFan (talk) 21:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Phoenix God moved this article from 2017 North Korean nuclear test to September 2017 North Korean nuclear test, citing consistency with the title of September 2016 North Korean nuclear test. While this is true, and consistency is a naming convention criteria, it's actually the September 2016 North Korean nuclear test article that is inconsistent with all the other articles at Category:North Korean nuclear weapons testing. The September 2016 North Korean nuclear test and January 2016 North Korean nuclear test articles have the month in the title as a natural qualifier to disambiguate between the two tests that took place that same year. All other nuclear test articles lack the month because it's an unnecessary qualifier.

I propose this article to be moved back to 2017 North Korean nuclear test to be consistent with all the other nuclear test articles that don't need a qualifier to disambiguate between multiple tests in the same year. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the article of previous nuclear test, I think that the "September 2017 North Korean nuclear test" title is more consistent than the 2017 North Korean nuclear test title. But, now after reading Finnusertop's point of view, I don't have any issue if someone wants to change back the article's name. Phoenix God (talk) 18:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Finnusertop that adding the month was unnecessary so far. Dobrichev (talk) 20:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, January 2016 North Korean nuclear test was originally 2016 North Korean nuclear test, but after another test in the same year, the month was added for distinction. --Cyberdoomslayer (talk) 01:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article name does not need to include the month. For consistency with the other North Korea nuclear test articles, it would be best to omit the month unless and until North Korea carries out a second nuclear test in 2017. NPguy (talk) 03:39, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep...I moved–Kiwipat (talk) 05:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First?

North Korea did not state it was its first test of a hydrogen bomb, and the source does not say it did. It also claimed the January 2016 North Korean nuclear test to be a H-bomb test.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:39, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GeoHack co-ords error

The 2017 North Korean nuclear test is pinned ~ 41°N 129°E while the 2017 North Korea earthquake pin is ~ 15°N 93°W, off the coast of southern Mexico. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Apostrophes (talk) 19:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]