Talk:Shagan (lake)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge?[edit]

Is there much point in having separate pages about the lake and the explosion that created it? The two seem so inextricably linked that there's no real difference between their subjects. I propose merging the lake article into the test article, leaving a redirect. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk

Sounds good to me. I think there's a bit of info here that's not in the test page (the glass), but otherwise they were identical. --Thatnewguy 05:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The size of the lake differs between the two pages though. Which is the correct one ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.189.230.172 (talk) 11:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Shouldn't this page at least have a picture of the Chagan lake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.45.142.73 (talk) 03:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of Lake Chagan[edit]

Yes, there's should be a photo. But ones with the right licensing seem scarce.

dino (talk) 23:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Still radioactive", fine but how radioactive is it?[edit]

Is it approachable, can you swim in it, is it closed off, what is the exact value? Anybody know? 76.168.51.241 (talk) 17:25, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose[edit]

Was this just a nuclear test or was it intended to create a reservoir? If so, was it for irrigation, drinking, or what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.144.207 (talk) 09:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose[edit]

How credible are these reports?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-used-nuclear-bomb-create-11213915

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4905826/Clip-shows-Soviet-nuke-used-create-new-reservoir.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.144.207 (talk) 09:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]