Talk:Radioactive contamination from the Rocky Flats Plant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleRadioactive contamination from the Rocky Flats Plant was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 24, 2013Good article nomineeListed
September 3, 2015Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 11, 2021Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

GAR[edit]

Radioactive contamination from the Rocky Flats Plant[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Delisted (t · c) buidhe 23:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by CaptainEek[edit]

An important article to get right, this page has unfortunately suffered in recent years. Its grown amorphous, its lead has ballooned, and it appears a number of inaccuracies have been introduced. In just the first paragraph there was an obvious typo, and even worse the lead photo caption had been clearly inaccurate for several years. I would do the full review myself, but I admit I am a bit short on time, November is always the busiest month...

  • Numerous uncited sentences
  • Lead too long, and just chock full of citations. Leads should summarize, not introduce tons of new info
  • Broad in its coverage is questionable, the history section is surprisingly short. Much more could be written about the two major fires, or the extensive cleanup operations. Just reading a single newspaper article [1], it is apparent how much is missing and could be included. That article is 20 years old too, so I wonder if there is more recent coverage. There appears to be a book out as well, which would be great to incorporate.
  • It looks like very few of the edits in recent years have been scrutinized at all, and the prose is not well integrated. I would like to see claims examined for factual accuracy, as well as for POV. Tensions around Rocky Flats have run hot through the years and I have no doubt some folks would like to push a certain narrative.

I imagine this article can be saved, but it will need some work. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! 04:59, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I nuked the lead back to the version when it ran for FAC. It is a bit of a blunt approach, but I not only adjudged it to be too long - it also was decidedly non-neutral (i.e saying Despite radioactive contamination remaining underground at the Rocky Flats AEC/DOE site, the U.S. government—with an inherent conflict of interest—eventually judged the plant's surrounding areas and their exposure risks suitable for any use). I would imagine there has been some POV editing into the lead. Now it could do with an update, bu this belongs in the body and needs to be more carefully worded. I might look into this later if I get time, but as it stands this does not reach a GA standard. Aircorn (talk) 04:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rocky Flats Contamination[edit]

In 1970 I worked for Environmetrics Inc. and did the original research on the Pu contamination from Rocky Flats. The report was given to the AEC shortly later.

We tracked contamination all the way to west central Kansas. Levels at that distance were not considered dangerous. The company owners were Otis Willoughby-who died of brain cancer six months after I left; and Dr. Gary G Olson- who died of anal cancer a few years later.

I lived in Broomfield many years, finally leaving in 1973. I graduated from Broomfield High School in 1967 and C. U. Boulder in 1971. So far, at age 73 I am cancer free. 199.168.73.246 (talk) 18:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]