This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
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:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Can we have some commentary on the scientific accuracy of the text in this booklet? I would imagine people will come here and read this stuff and consider it fully accurate unless they're told otherwise... 154.5.85.25009:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with the comment above - like many civil defence documents of the Cold War their intent was to sanitise nuclear weapons and particularly to tone down the lethality of both immediate bomb effects (heat/light/blast) and delayed effects, particularly radiation. It may need some kind of context to illustrate that this kind of document was typical of the era and should not be seen as a wholly accurate or reliable account of what to do if attacked with nuclear weapons. Gitfinger (talk) 12:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
