This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vasily Arkhipov 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 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was edited to contain a total or partial translation of Архипов, Василий Александрович from the Russian Wikipedia. Consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors. (This notice applies to version 349769873 and subsequent versions of this page.) |
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): Teaspoontom, Discusandhammer, Jcassidy6147, StevenMadden. Peer reviewers: Colleen1596, JasperBloodsworth.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed] MER-C 10:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
mikka (t) 08:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I'd second that. Also interested in learning why the Captain & co. couldn't communicate with Moscow to verify whether war had begun before making the decision? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriswhowell ( talk • contribs) 16:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Just because it is impossible for submarine while underwater to communicate with anyone outside of its sonar range (a few kilometers). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.194.106 ( talk) 20:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed MER-C 10:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Well I hope this helps, I'm not good at Russian and this was a bitch to do. Personally I think this should be taken with a grain of salt, seems to be from some Russian text of some sort. mcnichoj ( talk) 05:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Is is Vasiliy as the title suggests, or is Vasili as in the text?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.57.64 ( talk) 20:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
``Cuban Samba of the Foxtrot Quartet. translates to Kubinskaya Samba Kvarteta Fokstrotov but the ISBN (5773400413) listed for the book is for Istoriya zapadnykh slavyan by M. K. Lyubavskij -- Esemono ( talk) 09:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB75/asw-II-16.pdf
Cwmagee ( talk) 02:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
What is this? Is it a nuclear bomb in a torpedo? Who was it aimed at, the pursuing American ships or somewhere else? It's hard to see how firing a torpedo would start full nuclear war, that wouldn't begin until ICBMs were launched? 86.140.136.88 ( talk) 10:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yup, that's exactly what it was, a torpedo with a nuclear warhead in place of a conventional high-explosive warhead. The idea was to take out multiple ships with a single shot. And in all likelihood, any belligerent nuclear detonation, of whatever sort, would probably be enough to tip the US to a full-scale response, given the circumstances of the situation. Kalmbach ( talk) 02:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Indeed equalized the balance of power - don't forget that US already had nuclear missiles placed in Turkey. SU was attempting to returning the favor of placing nuclear missiles to their adversary's doorstep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.168.210 ( talk) 21:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
"started dropping practice depth charges, explosives intended to force the submarine to come to the surface for identification." Is it confirmed that it were "practice" depth charges?
Deleted text:
The story only really came out after 2001. Of course it's still possible that it inspired the film -- obviously the story had to have been known to some all along -- but I really doubt it. Likely just some Wikipedian noticed the similarity. -- 192.75.48.150 ( talk) 22:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
I added a note about Crimson Tide connection, but am just now seeing in the talk pages that this has already been addressed. I'll adjust my edit so that it does not imply a causal link. Davearthurs ( talk) 22:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Is it reasonable for an encyclopedia to report "The radiation to which he had been exposed in 1961 contributed to his death."?
The only reference for this is an article on guardian.co.uk, where the author claims (without any supporting evidence or even discussion) that "That radiation dose eventually contributed to his death in 1998."
Given that he 37 years after the incident, it should take more than the claim of a single journalist to support this being the cause of death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.199.156 ( talk) 17:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Is it known if the character of Vasili in Hunt For Red October is based on Vasili Arkhipov? 86.25.7.1 ( talk) 09:45, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
The following run on sentence also is poorly constructed and now factually incorrect:
Arknipov, as flotilla commander and second-in-command of the nuclear-weaponized submarine B-59, was the only one of the three officers who had to agree to the use of a nuclear torpedo who refused to do so.
I agree it could have been worded in a better way, but right now it's grammatically and factually incorrect. The sentence requires brackets or commas to indicate which officers agreed to the use, and again who refused to act. As it reads now, it states Arknipov was the only officer who agreed to the use of nuclear torpedoes. Mkdw talk 19:38, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
This guy should be canonized as a saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. Damn he's awesome. -- Monochrome_ Monitor 15:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not much of a wikipedian (so don't know all the rules), but surely such absolute predictions of the future are inappropriate? Even a "qualified" opinion couldn't predict the outcome of such a situation. 8dave ( talk) 23:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
This article lists two different birth places for Vasili Arkhipov: Staraya Kupavna and Zvorkovo I think the latter is correct, though I have no way to verify this.
68.197.220.64 ( talk) 19:10, 31 August 2017 (UTC) MK Alexander
The first 'external link' is unfortunately now pointing to a site dedicated to pornographic images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.33.225.87 ( talk) 12:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
The NSA translation of the Soviet Navy report (About participation of submarines “B-4,” “B-36,” “B-59,” “B-130” ... Section 3, second paragraph) calls Arkhipov chief of staff of the four submarines, not commander. (The commander of the brigade of four submarines was Agafonov Vasili Naumovich). This same term "chief of staff" (translation of начальник штаба) is used in the Parlamentskaya Gazette excerpt in the talk page, and the Russian version of the Vasily Arkhipov page (which I viewed in translation using DeepL).
Marfinan ( talk) 10:40, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Arkhipov gets credit for preventing a nuclear war by refusing to agree to the use of a nuclear-tipped torpedo. But who was the American commander (an admiral?) who decided to drop depth charges onto a Soviet submarine in international waters? He surely requires credit for nearly starting a nuclear war. NRPanikker ( talk) 02:12, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 19:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed MER-C 10:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)] 70.51.83.211 ( talk) 21:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Basically, all of our sources, at least the top results from the google, say that if the torpedo (a tactical weapon, and nuclear not thermonuclear -- article says it was a T-5 not a T-15) was launched then a spasm global thermonuclear war would have followed, 100% certainty. Maybe a few just say probably.
But surely this can't be true. Neither governments wanted war let alone nuclear war. It would extraordinarily stupid and evil for the American High Command (or Kennedy) to have a policy of "They fired a torpedo, one torpedo? The only possible response is that we must destroy the world." And the High Command is not comprised of stupid people. I don't believe it. (And I think -- think -- that we don't have anyone from the High Command, or anyone else who really knew, saying this. The people who are saying it weren't privy the thinking of the High Command, so they must be speculating, altho granted some are experts.)
Sure, even if there wasn't an immediate spasm war, thing could have escalated to that -- nothing's impossible. America would have responded. Maybe tit for tat, or maybe escalated, launching a theatre/tactical nuclear weapon -- or two or three or four -- or even an ICBM or two, against the Soviet fleet off Cuba and/or other Soviet military military targets (not cities). It is very very likely that Kruschev would then back down, as he ultimately did after all. Nor did his top generals want a spasm nuclear war. If not, we can't know what would have happened. But even if he had escalated, then Kennedy would have backed down. Mind you, "backed down" means saying "Whoa this has gone far enough. We will take the high road. Let us pause and have an emergency Soviet-American meeting" which the other side would have gladly accepted. But it could have somehow kept escalating to the end.
So yeah, in theory could have resulted in immediate all-out war, or that things would have escalated to all-out war. I can't prove that that wouldn't have happened, but neither can our sources prove that it would have
But, all our sources say the world would have been destroyed if the torpedo was launched. They have various reasons for saying this, sensationalism sometimes, wanting the emphasize the nuclear tightrope we have, they really believe it in their hearts, whatever. They are wrong pretty sure, but we have to go with them. I get that. But surely we can find contrary sources. I hate to pass on false things to the reader. Herostratus ( talk) 00:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
The course of events that would have followed such a launch cannot be known, but various speculations have been advanced, up to and including global thermonuclear war.So, there does not appear to be a problem to fix. We're already using collective editorial judgment to tone down the dubious "certainty" expressed by many of the sources. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:06, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vasily Arkhipov 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 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was edited to contain a total or partial translation of Архипов, Василий Александрович from the Russian Wikipedia. Consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors. (This notice applies to version 349769873 and subsequent versions of this page.) |
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): Teaspoontom, Discusandhammer, Jcassidy6147, StevenMadden. Peer reviewers: Colleen1596, JasperBloodsworth.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed] MER-C 10:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
mikka (t) 08:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I'd second that. Also interested in learning why the Captain & co. couldn't communicate with Moscow to verify whether war had begun before making the decision? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriswhowell ( talk • contribs) 16:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Just because it is impossible for submarine while underwater to communicate with anyone outside of its sonar range (a few kilometers). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.106.194.106 ( talk) 20:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed MER-C 10:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Well I hope this helps, I'm not good at Russian and this was a bitch to do. Personally I think this should be taken with a grain of salt, seems to be from some Russian text of some sort. mcnichoj ( talk) 05:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Is is Vasiliy as the title suggests, or is Vasili as in the text?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.57.64 ( talk) 20:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
``Cuban Samba of the Foxtrot Quartet. translates to Kubinskaya Samba Kvarteta Fokstrotov but the ISBN (5773400413) listed for the book is for Istoriya zapadnykh slavyan by M. K. Lyubavskij -- Esemono ( talk) 09:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB75/asw-II-16.pdf
Cwmagee ( talk) 02:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
What is this? Is it a nuclear bomb in a torpedo? Who was it aimed at, the pursuing American ships or somewhere else? It's hard to see how firing a torpedo would start full nuclear war, that wouldn't begin until ICBMs were launched? 86.140.136.88 ( talk) 10:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Yup, that's exactly what it was, a torpedo with a nuclear warhead in place of a conventional high-explosive warhead. The idea was to take out multiple ships with a single shot. And in all likelihood, any belligerent nuclear detonation, of whatever sort, would probably be enough to tip the US to a full-scale response, given the circumstances of the situation. Kalmbach ( talk) 02:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Indeed equalized the balance of power - don't forget that US already had nuclear missiles placed in Turkey. SU was attempting to returning the favor of placing nuclear missiles to their adversary's doorstep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.168.210 ( talk) 21:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
"started dropping practice depth charges, explosives intended to force the submarine to come to the surface for identification." Is it confirmed that it were "practice" depth charges?
Deleted text:
The story only really came out after 2001. Of course it's still possible that it inspired the film -- obviously the story had to have been known to some all along -- but I really doubt it. Likely just some Wikipedian noticed the similarity. -- 192.75.48.150 ( talk) 22:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
I added a note about Crimson Tide connection, but am just now seeing in the talk pages that this has already been addressed. I'll adjust my edit so that it does not imply a causal link. Davearthurs ( talk) 22:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Is it reasonable for an encyclopedia to report "The radiation to which he had been exposed in 1961 contributed to his death."?
The only reference for this is an article on guardian.co.uk, where the author claims (without any supporting evidence or even discussion) that "That radiation dose eventually contributed to his death in 1998."
Given that he 37 years after the incident, it should take more than the claim of a single journalist to support this being the cause of death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.199.156 ( talk) 17:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Is it known if the character of Vasili in Hunt For Red October is based on Vasili Arkhipov? 86.25.7.1 ( talk) 09:45, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
The following run on sentence also is poorly constructed and now factually incorrect:
Arknipov, as flotilla commander and second-in-command of the nuclear-weaponized submarine B-59, was the only one of the three officers who had to agree to the use of a nuclear torpedo who refused to do so.
I agree it could have been worded in a better way, but right now it's grammatically and factually incorrect. The sentence requires brackets or commas to indicate which officers agreed to the use, and again who refused to act. As it reads now, it states Arknipov was the only officer who agreed to the use of nuclear torpedoes. Mkdw talk 19:38, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
This guy should be canonized as a saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. Damn he's awesome. -- Monochrome_ Monitor 15:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not much of a wikipedian (so don't know all the rules), but surely such absolute predictions of the future are inappropriate? Even a "qualified" opinion couldn't predict the outcome of such a situation. 8dave ( talk) 23:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
This article lists two different birth places for Vasili Arkhipov: Staraya Kupavna and Zvorkovo I think the latter is correct, though I have no way to verify this.
68.197.220.64 ( talk) 19:10, 31 August 2017 (UTC) MK Alexander
The first 'external link' is unfortunately now pointing to a site dedicated to pornographic images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.33.225.87 ( talk) 12:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
The NSA translation of the Soviet Navy report (About participation of submarines “B-4,” “B-36,” “B-59,” “B-130” ... Section 3, second paragraph) calls Arkhipov chief of staff of the four submarines, not commander. (The commander of the brigade of four submarines was Agafonov Vasili Naumovich). This same term "chief of staff" (translation of начальник штаба) is used in the Parlamentskaya Gazette excerpt in the talk page, and the Russian version of the Vasily Arkhipov page (which I viewed in translation using DeepL).
Marfinan ( talk) 10:40, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Arkhipov gets credit for preventing a nuclear war by refusing to agree to the use of a nuclear-tipped torpedo. But who was the American commander (an admiral?) who decided to drop depth charges onto a Soviet submarine in international waters? He surely requires credit for nearly starting a nuclear war. NRPanikker ( talk) 02:12, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 19:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
[copyright violation removed MER-C 10:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)] 70.51.83.211 ( talk) 21:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Basically, all of our sources, at least the top results from the google, say that if the torpedo (a tactical weapon, and nuclear not thermonuclear -- article says it was a T-5 not a T-15) was launched then a spasm global thermonuclear war would have followed, 100% certainty. Maybe a few just say probably.
But surely this can't be true. Neither governments wanted war let alone nuclear war. It would extraordinarily stupid and evil for the American High Command (or Kennedy) to have a policy of "They fired a torpedo, one torpedo? The only possible response is that we must destroy the world." And the High Command is not comprised of stupid people. I don't believe it. (And I think -- think -- that we don't have anyone from the High Command, or anyone else who really knew, saying this. The people who are saying it weren't privy the thinking of the High Command, so they must be speculating, altho granted some are experts.)
Sure, even if there wasn't an immediate spasm war, thing could have escalated to that -- nothing's impossible. America would have responded. Maybe tit for tat, or maybe escalated, launching a theatre/tactical nuclear weapon -- or two or three or four -- or even an ICBM or two, against the Soviet fleet off Cuba and/or other Soviet military military targets (not cities). It is very very likely that Kruschev would then back down, as he ultimately did after all. Nor did his top generals want a spasm nuclear war. If not, we can't know what would have happened. But even if he had escalated, then Kennedy would have backed down. Mind you, "backed down" means saying "Whoa this has gone far enough. We will take the high road. Let us pause and have an emergency Soviet-American meeting" which the other side would have gladly accepted. But it could have somehow kept escalating to the end.
So yeah, in theory could have resulted in immediate all-out war, or that things would have escalated to all-out war. I can't prove that that wouldn't have happened, but neither can our sources prove that it would have
But, all our sources say the world would have been destroyed if the torpedo was launched. They have various reasons for saying this, sensationalism sometimes, wanting the emphasize the nuclear tightrope we have, they really believe it in their hearts, whatever. They are wrong pretty sure, but we have to go with them. I get that. But surely we can find contrary sources. I hate to pass on false things to the reader. Herostratus ( talk) 00:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
The course of events that would have followed such a launch cannot be known, but various speculations have been advanced, up to and including global thermonuclear war.So, there does not appear to be a problem to fix. We're already using collective editorial judgment to tone down the dubious "certainty" expressed by many of the sources. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:06, 28 August 2023 (UTC)