Open main menu

Comments:Japan nuclear disaster: areas to remain off-limits for decades

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion

Comments from feedback form - "it sucked"

it sucked

74.140.224.67 (talk)02:37, 27 September 2011

Comments from feedback form - "have seen no reports on injuri..."

have seen no reports on injuries or deaths caused by the nuclear contamination or explosions,please , any infomation helps. Thank you

75.36.232.124 (talk)18:23, 30 August 2011

Comments from feedback form - "The Japanese are supose to be ..."

The Japanese are supose to be one of the most advanced countries and look at what happened to them. This is a warning to all of us that we are not safe in any country. We should have learned from past mistakes. This will happen again.

67.128.3.2 (talk)00:09, 30 August 2011

so, if 'm reading this right...

Some of these folks can't go home for 30 YEARS.

Fucking nuclear energy...

138.89.178.37 (talk)05:31, 25 August 2011

at least they're alive, countless people have died on oil rigs and down mine shafts fucking oil and coal energy

Mcchino64 (talk)07:33, 25 August 2011

hmmm I think there should be a comma there somewhere...

Mcchino64 (talk)07:33, 25 August 2011
 

SOLAR energy is the way to go!

156.8.251.250 (talk)21:57, 29 August 2011
 
 

Comments from feedback form - "The article should contain lin..."

The article should contain links to the back story, especially in Wikipedia itself. In this case, it should have had links to the reports of the earthquake and subsequent tsunami.

203.76.185.77 (talk)06:15, 26 August 2011

main contaminent

Not really sure what the expert means by 'main'radioactive element. I'm not sure this means in initial abundance or main hazard or longest half-life. There's not enough clarity in reports of nuclear accidents, and people are all to happy to become hysterical armed only with wooly facts.

Mcchino64 (talk)07:38, 25 August 2011