Talk:Fat Man

Incorrect labelling and description of Fat-Man

Fat-Man was not a 'nuclear' weapon - it was a plutonium implosion atomic fission device. Until the Ivy Mike shot on 1st November 1952 when the first Teller-Ulam design at Eniwetok Atoll in the Marshall Islands was successfully detonated - a true thermonuclear, or Hydrogen, weapon - nothing prior to this test was a 'nuclear' weapon. Only an atomic weapon. The second sentence of the second paragraph in the introduction is factually incorrect and misconstrues - meaning it is a falsehood - the type of atomic device the article is talking about. As this is a protected and locked page, someone with permission, and understanding of these matters, needs to correct this entire sentence.

The link utilised is also misrepresenting the type of device Fat-Man was because the section of the article it is linked to does not mention the word 'nuclear' once, yet the hyperlink does??

Furthermore, the entire article itself misrepresents what an atomic and nuclear device is because it is titled "Nuclear weapon design" in the first place. Simply put, nothing prior to November 1952 is a 'nuclear' weapon, they are only atomic weapons, this article needs quite a heavy amount of correcting for the fact nuclear is being euphemistically applied to all such devices, which is factually incorrect. There is a picture of the Trinity test device being labelled a 'nuclear' explosion, when it was only an atomic explosion. In fact, the first line of the article's introduction has a hyperlink to an article labelled "Nuclear weapon" which in and of itself is also incorrect. However, that article's first line, albeit somewhat confusingly, at least denotes and articulates the difference between a fission (atomic) and fusion (hydrogen or thermonuclear) device or weapon.

All of these articles need correcting, fellow contributors, by someone with permission to do so. I'm currently writing a thesis on Nuclear Proliferation and Nuclear Deterrence Theory, and I came across these misrepresentations via various other hyperlinks looking for specific dates about when specific designs of these weapons occurred. The entire series of atomic and/or nuclear weapons testing and invention seems to be extremely haphazardly articulated and jumbled together in very misrepresented context people. I honestly mean no personal offence to the original writers but this needs correcting in a world of disinformation now days... WolfStonerRocker ^G'DÄŸ 23:54, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

All atomic bombs are nuclear weapons, both fission and fusion. The scientists used the term "nuclear" from the beginning, but "atomic" gained more currency with the public. Gradually, "nuclear" won out. See here for details. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:45, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2025

In note #54, change incorrect author name (Thomas Gaulkin) to correct author names, Ellen Bradbury and Sandra Blakeslee:

Bradbury, Ellen; Blakeslee, Sandra (5 August 2022). "The harrowing story of the Nagasaki bombing mission". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. ... Whaddayacare (talk) 06:02, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Yes check.svg Done Corrected the error. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:41, 14 March 2025 (UTC)