This article was nominated for deletion on 18 June 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This page was
proposed for deletion by
PL290 (
talk ·
contribs) on 17 June 2009 with the comment: It consists entirely of entries that should not be created on disambiguation pages. Also there are many other articles with titles starting "Nuclear" than listed here. It was contested by 70.29.212.226 ( talk · contribs) on 2009-06-18 with the comment: longstanding page. 2001!!! |
Disambiguation | ||||
|
I don't believe this is a long enough definition for the word Nuclear. It doesn't have enough detail either.
I can't believe it. I enter a good site on your article, and I'm accused of vandalism! Thanks a lot Snoyes! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
205.213.111.51 (
talk)
15:18, 30 September 2004 (UTC)
OK.
Is the pronunciation really under dispute? Are there any sources for pronouncing it as "new-kyoo-ler"?
It has to be "new-clee-ar", phonetically. "new-kyoo-lar" is just a sort of slang.
Granted that the accepted standard pronunciation is "new-clee-ar", that is not what the IPA phonetic transcription in the article now indicates. It needs to be corrected. I am not familiar with the technicalities of using the IPA font. Is there someone out there who could fix it? -- A R King 19:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Nuclear is a form of the word nucleus. It only belongs in a dictionary, not in an encyclopedia. David R. Ingham 00:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Was going to suggest that the now WIDESPREAD ("wrong") nucular pronunciation means that this article needs to mention this debate, but I seem to have been beaten to it. It is elitist vs the common man, it is partisan and political. It is also a bone of contention in UK or USA use of English. The shortened form "nuke" has led to this situation. What a surprise that Bush's enemies are already in evidence here. Some would say that if his pronunciation of certain words is all you can find to complain about then he must be an superb President. We need to mention that the different pronunciations are a cause of substantial argument and mutual antagonism. There aren't many words you can say that about. -- 81.105.251.160 15:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 18 June 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This page was
proposed for deletion by
PL290 (
talk ·
contribs) on 17 June 2009 with the comment: It consists entirely of entries that should not be created on disambiguation pages. Also there are many other articles with titles starting "Nuclear" than listed here. It was contested by 70.29.212.226 ( talk · contribs) on 2009-06-18 with the comment: longstanding page. 2001!!! |
Disambiguation | ||||
|
I don't believe this is a long enough definition for the word Nuclear. It doesn't have enough detail either.
I can't believe it. I enter a good site on your article, and I'm accused of vandalism! Thanks a lot Snoyes! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
205.213.111.51 (
talk)
15:18, 30 September 2004 (UTC)
OK.
Is the pronunciation really under dispute? Are there any sources for pronouncing it as "new-kyoo-ler"?
It has to be "new-clee-ar", phonetically. "new-kyoo-lar" is just a sort of slang.
Granted that the accepted standard pronunciation is "new-clee-ar", that is not what the IPA phonetic transcription in the article now indicates. It needs to be corrected. I am not familiar with the technicalities of using the IPA font. Is there someone out there who could fix it? -- A R King 19:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Nuclear is a form of the word nucleus. It only belongs in a dictionary, not in an encyclopedia. David R. Ingham 00:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Was going to suggest that the now WIDESPREAD ("wrong") nucular pronunciation means that this article needs to mention this debate, but I seem to have been beaten to it. It is elitist vs the common man, it is partisan and political. It is also a bone of contention in UK or USA use of English. The shortened form "nuke" has led to this situation. What a surprise that Bush's enemies are already in evidence here. Some would say that if his pronunciation of certain words is all you can find to complain about then he must be an superb President. We need to mention that the different pronunciations are a cause of substantial argument and mutual antagonism. There aren't many words you can say that about. -- 81.105.251.160 15:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)