Talk:START I

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GravityActually.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

POV sentence
Under Expiration and Renewal, 4th paragraph, it says:

"The Bush Administration was using the Eastern Europe defense system as a deterrent for Iran, despite the Kremlin's fear that it could be used against Russia."

Oh come on. Just because the United States claims this, doesn't necessarily make it true. I'm rewriting this sentence to make it more neutral. Skyduster (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay. I slightly edited the sentence to make it neutral:


 * "The Bush Administration insisted that the Eastern Europe defense system was intended as a deterrent for Iran, while the Kremlin feared that it could be used against Russia."


 * Let's please remember to remain neutral. Skyduster (talk) 21:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Russia's complaint
Apparently in 2001 Russia filed a complaint stating that the United States was violating the START I treaty by not only failing to decomission the required amount of warheads but by actually producing more. This has since been corrected but I think it would make a valuble addition to the article if anyone can find the American defence to these claims. I have found the Russian statement but the American Defence has not yet been found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.60.79 (talk • contribs) Dec 19, 2005
 * I remember seeing Department of Energy contracts for manufacturing tritium because the START treaty actually mandates levels of the size of the arsenal. Left to age, most nuclear warheads will degrade since tritium has a half life of about a decade. So, the start treaty actually required the DOE manufacture tritium to keep the weapons operational (and/or at the designed yield?). I believe this was a common complaint about the START treaty in the years after it's ratification in 1991. Jeff Carr (talk) 17:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Legality of nuclear weapons
I'm trying to work on articles to do with the legality of nuclear weapons; drop me a message at my talk page if you want to help. --Jim (Talk) 00:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Renewal
Wouldn't it be better to split off Expiration and renewal section and create a new article? The upcoming treaty is by no means prolongation of an old one but brand-new treaty. In Russian Wiki, it's just like that: ru:СНВ-III. --Парс (talk) 19:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I have created a new article called Measures to Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. This name was put forward by BBC NEWS (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8589385.stm) and it is my belief that this is the official name. I agree with the person above that this agreement is significant enough to warrant a separate article. (It is realistic to assume that the amount will grow considerably in the future, and it would no longer fit into this page!) Lesswealth (talk) 18:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

B-52Gs
As an aside, only 193 B-52Gs were built. The balance of the 365 aircraft were older variants that had long been retired to AMARC but could have been reactivated if necessary 130.88.99.217 (talk) 09:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Captions
Has anybody else noticed about 3 of the picture captions are in German/French...? This is English Wikipedia, right? Anybody want to translate those? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.122.11 (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ Binksternet (talk) 22:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Where Did The old fissile material go?
Since as far as I know most H - Bombs are initiated by A - Bombs to energize the hydrogen and start it's fusion; I wonder what was done with the old uranium and plutonium detonaters once the missiles were decommissioned. Since weapons grade is about 80% U 235 and civilian reactors only use about 20% U 235 it hardly seems that it could have been used for civilian power generation.JeepAssembler (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)JeepAssemblerJeepAssembler (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on START I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080323112510/http://www.cnn.com:80/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/the.bomb/route/06.amarc/ to http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/the.bomb/route/06.amarc/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

History is missing
The key section of history is missing. The "Negotiations" section jumps from "Strategic Defense Initiative program in 1983 was viewed as a threat by the Soviet Union, and the Soviets withdrew from setting a timetable for further negotiations"... and then goes to the next section, where implementation is discussed. Somewhere in there the Soviets must have agreed to negotiate, and I assume the treaty actually wassigned... what happened? When? Michael-Zero (talk) 03:14, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on START I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120503060154/http://www.cdi.org:80/russia/johnson/2008-Archive-040108-START.cfm to http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/2008-Archive-040108-START.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:22, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on START I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090718224210/http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep870-1-49/start.pdf to http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-pamphlets/ep870-1-49/start.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)