Jump to content

Talk:Fat Man and Little Boy (film)

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

Dance of the Reed Pipes[edit]

In this movie they play Tchaikovsky's "Dance of the Reed Pipes" ("Danse des Mirlitons") over the PA system during the countdown to the Trinity test. Anybody know if that's for real? --Yath 8 July 2005 22:18 (UTC)

Richard Rhodes' The Making of the Atomic Bomb doesn't mention it in his quite comprehensive account of the Trinity test. Sapient 17:06, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to read the article on this film in the book, Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies. The writer of the article says they were playing another classical piece during the test (I think they were unable to shut off the PA system for some reason or other). I forget exactly what the piece was that was played in real life, but it wasn't "Dance of the Reed Pipes." This is only a minor inaccuracy, but the film has several other errors that are more noteworthy.24.56.112.3 (talk) 19:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Fat man and little boy.jpg[edit]

Image:Fat man and little boy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Erm. Tone problems?[edit]

"In the end, both Fat Man and Little Boy were successful. Finally, despite ruining the lives of many separate individuals, mankind developed technologies capable of threatening all life on Earth."

I'm having trouble commenting on this without slipping into the same sort of immature, sarcastic tone... Of course, there's a chance that the person who wrote this was oblivious to it, but I kinda doubt it. :)

If you're going to say it, at least find me a citation confirming that nuclear weapons do, in fact, threaten all life on earth. Considering where some of these critters live, I highly doubt it. ;)

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure there are rules against inserting preachy, opinionated nonsense into articles. Without citations, I mean. 12.19.84.33 (talk) 21:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs a section on "Inaccuracies."[edit]

"Fat Man and Little Boy", like most historical movies, is loaded with inaccuracies and distortions. The article fails to bring those out. For instance, Leslie Groves never had to blackmail Robert Oppenheimer into going along with the Manhattan Project. Oppenheimer fully supported the use of the atomic bomb. He only changed his mind after he saw the extent of its damage. His "conscience" was nothing but second-guessing.24.56.112.3 (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracies need to be verified by reliable sources. If the film is partially known for its inaccuracies, then surely reliable sources exist to describe some of them. Otherwise, such details that are derived from editors with specialist knowledge are not appropriate, per WP:PSTS. Let me know if you want me to help research this particular sub-topic. Erik (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Someone in a preceding section mentioned the book Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies. It contains a great article that exposes the gross distortions in this movie.97.73.64.146 (talk) 01:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tickling the dragon's tail[edit]

Quote: This episode is drawn from an accident that happened to physicist Louis Slotin and is shown precisely as it happened

It's not. For one, Laura Dern didn't promise Louis Slotin to make sweet love the night after, there is no evidence of a spilled cup of coffee causing the supercriticality, and because the whole thing happened after the first two atomic bombs were dropped in Japan. Maikel (talk) 00:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 April 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. and create dab. – robertsky (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fat Man and Little Boy → Fat Man and Little Boy (film) – The Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are commonly known by the names of the bombs used: Fat Man and Little Boy. This RM would clear such confusion and would clarify that the film is, well… a film. If consensus is reached to move, I will also consider updating the redirect target to direct to the bombings. DS537(WIR) 13:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support the film has 9,440 views but the bombings has 325,013 and the Simpsons episode has 402[1]. I'd perhaps suggest making the base name a DAB though. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and per Crouch, Swale, in complete agreement with their analysis. Seeing this title, with no further context, would bring to mind the bombs themselves before bringing to mind the film, or any other sense. My first inclination would be to section-redirect this title to Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki#Atomic bomb development, but that would obscure the other meanings, so disambiguation may be the best route. BD2412 T 19:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as unnecessary WP:OVERPRECISION. There is no other article titled Fat Man and Little Boy, so no title conflict. Fat Man and Little Boy already have their own separate articles, which can be linked directly from the hatnote or from Fat Man and Little Boy (disambiguation). Making Fat Man and Little Boy a dab page would do nothing for any reader except make those looking for the film go through an unnecessary extra step to get to the article they want and expect. Station1 (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: "Fat Man and Little Boy" should redirect to the page about the bombings, which is a more important subject and (as Crouch, Swale says above) a more widely-read page. A hatnote on the bombings page can direct people who are looking for the film here. Toughpigs (talk) 17:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fat_Man_and_Little_Boy_(film)&oldid=1221872991"