Talk:Diablo Canyon Power Plant
Latest comment: 24 days ago by Klbrain in topic Proposed merge of Diablo Canyon earthquake vulnerability into Diablo Canyon Power Plant
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Diablo Canyon Power Plant article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
US Court of Appeals
editWhy is there no mention of the current case in front of the US Court of Appeals regarding safety and closure of DCNPP?
Proposed merge of Diablo Canyon earthquake vulnerability into Diablo Canyon Power Plant
edit- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- To not merge, given the contemporary relevance, sourcing and independent notability of [[Diablo Canyon earthquake vulnerability]]. Klbrain (talk) 13:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Appears to be an instance of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:SYNTH and WP:INDISCRIMINATE simply stating facts about the topic. I do sense that this is borderline notable as seismology of Diablo Canyon is well discussed, but I think this information is better suited for the main article about the power plant. Awesome Aasim 03:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support merge. ---Avatar317(talk) 00:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose merge - Article is valuable as a stand-alone and likely to become more so as discussion continues in California as to the wisdom of continuing the operation of a nuclear power plant at the location. Jusdafax (talk) 12:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Merge- Article is well sourced and proves its worth as a standalone article. NewishIdeas (talk) 22:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.