text:
Talk:Pre-Roman Iron Age (Northern Europe)

[Untitled]
''I believe it is CRUCIAL to point out the roots of the "Pre-Roman Iron Age" IN CONTEXT. You will note that iron was brought to NW Europe by the Celts... who, when they replaced the "Atlantic Bronze Age" in Gaul and Britain in c. 600 BCE brought iron to those lands. THUS, the "strong La Tene and Halstadtt" influences seen in the Germanic Pre-Roman Iron Age are COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDABLE... the Celts were a power in their day and they influenced (conquered) Gaul, Britain and continental Germany all around the same time... around 600 BCE, around the time of Baalovesus.''

This fragment has not been created as part of any existing continuous history. It does not stand on its own. Where should it be merged? Wetman 08:21, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Is "Montelius" Oscar Montelius 1843 - 1921. What is the modern name for this culture? What does "pre-Roman" mean in an area that never was Roman? Why is "Scandinavia" not in the title? Wetman 09:58, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * "The name "Pre-Roman Iron Age" signifies that it was before the influx of Roman imports into Scandinavia. The following age, which I will write on in due time is called the "Roman Iron Age" because there were Roman imports and Rome was very powerful. The age following it is called the "Germanic Iron Age", but some also call it the "Age of Migrations" or even the "Heroic Age"." (User:Wiglaf responding on my Talk page Wetman 18:58, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC))
 * There is also a Pre-Roman iron age in Britain which is not mentioned in the article. Rmhermen 00:48, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding relevant information.--Wiglaf 19:46, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A better title?

 * A possible better title: Archaeology of Iron-Age Scandinavia Would there be any objection to such a plain description? It is archaeology, isn't it?  Wetman 01:10, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes it is archaeology. The problem is that the culture(s) that are covered by this term (in the Montelian sense) did not exist exclusively in Scandinavia, but also in northern Germany, nor did they exist in all of Scandinavia. It was only in the southern half, and along the coasts, that we can talk of Pre-Roman Iron Age. In most the northern half there was a hunter and gatherer culture (probably Fenno-Ugric). If I'd rename it, it would rather be Pre-Roman Iron Age (Germanic) (since it probably corresponded to the distribution of Germanic languages at the time). However, I am not sure that the term applies to areas where Germanic tribes mixed with previous cultures, such as the Wielbark/Willenberg culture in northern Poland. We could wait with the naming until someone makes a page about the British Pre-Roman Age, then we could make Pre-Roman Iron Age into a disambiguation page.--Wiglaf 19:45, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The Pre-Roman Iron Age in Britain is currently treated at Prehistoric Britain, also not a very felicitous title. The immediately preceding culture is described at Nordic Bronze Age: why isn't Nordic Iron Age acceptable? --Wetman 03:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

 * is there such a thing as "Roman Iron Age"? according to Iron Age, the iron age is held to end with the roman conquest (while of course the romans metallurgically belong to the iron age, the term generally implies prehistoric times – which is strange, because "Bronze Age" is not restricted in such a way) dab 14:28, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, during the Roman domination of Europe, the Scandinavians and the Germans lived in the Roman Iron Age according to the still used Montelian time-line. This age was succeeded by the Age Migrations. The naming is logic since the influence of the Romans was not restricted to the Roman empire but was felt in the areas of Germanic settlement. IIRC, the terminology for cooking was largely borrowed into the Germanic languages during the Roman Iron Age. I did not invent the name. I am only introducing a used term into Wikipedia.--Wiglaf 14:58, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * A sub-section in the entry could work in this material, to orient the ordinary reader. The references to contemporary cultures outside the area covered are helpful. Are there some sites that could be described briefly? External links? The Dejbjerg wagon is unfamiliar: a full-size wagon? a votive object? a funerary wagon? If the term describes the level of technology, then that should be described and contrasted with the Roman Iron Age that followed. Wetman 02:27, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Good ideas. I will get back when I have finished my present project.--Wiglaf 08:41, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Further criticisms

 * "(also called the Celtic Iron Age)" I removed this interpolation. The map still seems specifically to exclude Celtic regions, and isn't the whole point (not yet being clearly made) that this culture is not the La Tène culture?
 * "(ca 600 BC or 500 BC - ca 1 AD)" Is "ca 1 AD" a code for the beginning of the Roman Iron Age? What makes the date so precise?
 * "Fimbul winter" I removed this ancient expression, which for Rutger Sernander in the 1920s linked the sudden onset of cold to the saga cycles: a red herring here, unless you want to make it the specific theme of a paragraph. This sudden climatic chill (ca 600BC?) must have a standard name in current climatology: use it in the text, and I'll make a hyperlink, and I'll make a stub article for it, so that identifying it further doesn't hamper your narrative here. I linked the Gundestrup Cauldron. Tollund Man and the Hjortspring boat are mentioned: have other Pre-Roman Iron Age sites and finds already received articles at Wikipedia?

I've made notes in the html of the article: I hope you'll take them seriously, as I tried to make them specific and clear. --Wetman 03:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

 * The name Celtic Iron Age is a factual term that is used about this age, just like the next age is called the Roman Iron Age. The dating varies. It is 600 BC for northern Germany and 500 BC for Norway, but this article should have the appropriate geographic scope. The date 1 AD, is just convention, and has little to do with any "objective" change. As for the name of the climate change, I don't know if it has a proper English term, but I will find out.--Wiglaf 07:10, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

 * The Celtic Iron Age you refer to is the La Tène culture isn't it? Wouldn't it help the reader to say so? --Wetman 19:05, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, no. I have not invented this set of terminology. When Scandinavian archaeologists talk of the Celtic Iron Age, they are talking of this period in Northern Europe and not the La Tène culture. I understand that this kind of terminology is confusing, but I think that the article should state what the time and culture is called.--Wiglaf 19:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * An Iron Age Celtic culture in Scandinavia will make an interesting article. --Wetman 07:14, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I think you're misunderstanding. The name Celtic in the expression Celtic Iron Age only refers to the fact that northern Europe was under heavy Celtic influence, cf. the Ambrones.--Wiglaf 07:17, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

timeline
the timeline seems offtopic here. What you'd expect would be a timeline of the Pre-Roman Iron Age, not a gigantic timeline where the P-R IA is featured as a single item. dab (ᛏ) 13:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Remove the introduction
I think that the references to nineteenth century danish archeologists should either be deleted moved to a special section at the end of the article. They make the introduction unnecesarily long and confusing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.184.26.120 (talk) 21:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

Jastorf expansions
It says: "Its area was first delimited by the Weser in the West, the Aller in the South, and the Danish Islands in the North, but later it expanded southwards towards the Rhine and the Harz." According to the information illustrated on maps the Jastorf culture never passed the Harz. Please supply any sourced reference on this theory that Jastorf expanded to the Rhine. I don't think this is established truth, I suspect OR. Rokus01 06:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I did an extensive websearch for sources now. To be fair, I found no reference that the culture expanded beyond Lower Saxony. I thus agree that any claim concerning the Rhine needs a clear reference. Otoh, since the Harz actually forms the southwerstern boundary of Lower Saxony, I see no problem with keeping it in (the Weser in fact originates to the south and the west of the Harz). dab (𒁳) 19:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * per Image:Pre-roman iron age (map).PNG, our reference for the Jastorf culture extending west to the Rhine delta appears to be the the Harper Atlas of World History (1993), ISBN 978-0062700674. dab (𒁳) 20:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Rokus01 20:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * First: thanks for the improvements
 * About the map: I recognize the extend of Northern Bronze Age as it appears in articles nowadays, but this does not fit the description and the colors, nor the extend of Jastorf.
 * the img discription claims the purple area is Jastorf. I did not verify this, you'll have to consult the Harper Atlas. dab (𒁳) 21:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Of this atlas I can read on the web that the contributors were encouraged "to give alternate positions on matters where there is not a generally accepted opinion" (p6). Unfortunately I can't check either and I propose to rather adhere to primary sources on this matter.Rokus01 06:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Correction: this quote is from another Harper Atlas edition. However, I don't think the Harper policy would have been any different in this one. Rokus01 06:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

look, there are two separate points: If you can show that the map isn't faithful, we'll remove it. If the map does give the Harper scenario faithfully, that's at least one notable source. It's not like we can choose from dozens of published maps of the Jastorf culture: it will then be up to you to present another respectable source. I am not sure why you are pressing this point so much: it is impossible to give exact boundaries of archaeological cultures. And if you want to argue that the Netherlands was part of proto-Germanic culture, as you seem to be doing, you will want to emphasize, not de-emphasize, Jastorf-Nordwestblock connections. At the end of the day, the lower Rhine was at the fringe of Jastorf/Proto-Germanic influence, and it is impossible to say when the area became linguistically Germanic. No amount of map-tuning is going to change the fact that we simply don't know. dab (𒁳) 07:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * does the map faithfully represent the "Jastorf" area given in the Harper atlas?
 * if it does, is it in conflict with other sources?

At least the map conflicts with the written description of the area. However, more important is how the Jastorf culture is to be interpretated, ethnic, archeologic or cultural, since I would agree to the area being ethnically germanic. However, since the archeological difference between Germanic and Celtic culture is not always as obvious as this article suggests, ethnic division lines on such an archeological "Jastorf" basis are artificial, intuitive and tentative by definition. Worse, all efforts to link Jastorf with proto-Germanic instead of Germanic insinuate a claim of ethnic ancestry not supported by general opinion, clear evidence or definition. You think it is immaterial. I think it is essential. Britannica confirms there is no clue to assign the Germanic soundshift in any period including Bronze Age. So when? The timegap between proto-indo european and proto-germanic will remain huge, wherever you put proto-germanic on the timeline. At least, the sources I know of all conveniently use the nomer Germanic to Jastorf (or whatever Iron Age "Germanic" culture), not proto-germanic, I think this should be the same here for not giving too much weight to the point of view that Germanic could only have originated in the Iron Age. I repeat, according to general accepted thinking, Germanic still could have existed or originated in Bronze Age. The difference to proto germanic would be immaterial only in case the genesis of a unified Germanic happened by some kind of instantaneous process of diffusion, anywhere anytime. Instead, your view is reflected by the tendency to emphasis Jastorf military expansions and insert a recent germanization (6th-1st BC?). I repeat, no such intrusive links are evident to the west nor to other areas across the Harz. Proponents of such impact of Jastorf expansions can't rely anymore on a lack of excavations to push their tentative theories. The area is well searched and investigated. So why? Assuming one cultural area that shared linguistic developments by diffusion, neither the Nordwestblock nor Rhineland need a special link to Jastorf at all. It would be enough to consider (and assume, probably the only drawback to this alternative) the early common Indo European origin and the traditional cultural ties already in place during the Northern Bronze Age. With scholars still fighting to resolve the issue (with progress both on understanding linguistics and archeology), why should we pretend to know it all and insist on a particular view already? Rokus01 20:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

 * The linguistic side is pretty clear. The Proto-Germanic stage we can reconstruct cannot be particularly old, as our oldest attestations (especially runic inscriptions, but also the classical Nebenüberlieferung) are close to this reconstruction. Earlier stages can only be reached indirectly and are much less certain. Old loanwords in Uralic languages may represent Bronze-Age stages of still unshifted, still laryngeal-containing (Pre-Proto-)Germanic, but the precise affiliation of the language(s) or dialect(s) represented in these loans is by no means clear and they may represent a rather generic, undifferentiated northern Indo-European dialect or group of dialects that may or may not include dialects ancestral to Proto-Germanic. It is frustrating to deal with the period in between Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Germanic (likely about 3000 years at least!) because in the absence of close relatives of Germanic, and of revealing loanword layers (except perhaps in Uralic), almost nothing reasonably certain can be known about this period. So we're on safe ground only from the time Proto-Germanic proper (the latest common ancestral stage of the Germanic languages) begins to diverge. It is unlikely that this already happened in the time of the Nordic Bronze Age, perhaps at its very end. However, it is completely unclear what kind of Indo-European was spoken in Bronze Age Scandinavia. It's right in the dreaded gap. My guess would be some collateral branch to Germanic, like Sabellic (or Italic in general) to Latin, not necessarily a direct ancestor. (Again, this could be the source, or part of the source, of the Northwest Indo-European loanwords in Uralic.) Keep in mind early loanwords from Celtic such as *Walhaz, which indicate that the consonant shift is not all that old. The Pre-Roman Iron Age is the most likely period when Proto-Germanic proper was spoken, and when the divergence began. So it is reasonable to identify the Jastorf culture with the earliest speakers of Germanic as we know it (and can recognise by the presence of the consonant shift). It is absolutely essential to keep the distinction between Proto-Germanic proper and its ancestral stages in mind. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

removed section
I have removed this unsourced section:
 * Strong evidence contrary to the above paragraph comes from the fact that "Germanic tribes" were apparently quite content to remain in comparatively improverished conditions for at least a thousand years before their first appearance in southern European consciousness. Given that rich territories to the south were within a few weeks march -- at most -- of the Jastorf locale, this points to the conclusion that these northern peoples were hardly aggressive for the greater part of pre-history. What may have set off aggressive behavior on the part of these more northern Germanic speakers was the example set by Gauls, Greeks and Romans. The organization and communication needed to mount a serious attack was probably imported from the south. As far as the expansion of Jastorf, the first impression would that it would have been an expansion into the relatively unpopulated no-man's land of central Europe. (See John Collis, The European Iron Age) Discredited 19th Century thinking suggesting some kind of innate warrior mentality often leads to poor historical analysis.

This section appears to contradict what we know about the Teutons and the Cimbri, and the claim that pre-historic peoples were happy to live peacefully in "improverished" (sic.) conditions until educated to organize warfare by Celts and Romans appears to be original reseach. Moreover, I strongly doubt that the Celts were so incredibly superior to the Germanics culturally that the former were able to wage war while the latter were incapable of such organizatorial feats.--Berig 08:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

What we know about Teutons and Cimbri came to us through the words of their enemies. The famous aggression of Germanic could be partly religious and typical to barbarians, and partly due to the countless annihilation wars waged against them by the Romans, the very powerful influence of the Roman military that recruited Germanics, the wealth bestowed on Germanics that cooperated with Rome or fought in name of Rome etc. Very often the Great Mgrations and the Viking outrages are looked upon as "typical". However, remember the conversion of Odin from god of creation, poetry and arts to god of war occurred in more recent times. The upheavels of history are never typical. I think it is worthwhile to keep a section dedicated to both sides of the story. Rokus01 09:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * this is pure editorializing. Sure, this is prehistory, there is a lot of room for speculation. This is however no excuse to compose rambling essays. In particular "Discredited 19th Century thinking suggesting some kind of innate warrior mentality often leads to poor historical analysis" is nonsense in this context. This simply doesn't apply to the Pre-Roman Iron Age. Not even the 19th century could depict a culture without any weapon finds as warrior society. The warrior aspect emerges in the Roman Iron Age, which is undoubtedly Germanic, and which from the 2nd century AD indeed shows a predilection for weapons. So if you must shoot down 19th century strawmen, please do it on the pertinent article at least. dab (𒁳) 09:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The rambling essay was already here and I expect anybody removing one thing to do some effort in putting something better: anybody who fail (or refuse) to understand alternative arguments I consider disqualified to destroy information. The intervention more or less solved this, congratulations. By the way : "Moreover, I strongly doubt that the Celts were so incredibly superior to the Germanics culturally that the former were able to wage war while the latter were incapable of such organizatorial feats."?? Is superiority already measured in the ability to wage war? Now my love for truth seems to be mistaken for ideology, I really wonder what kind of non-ideology you would call such a statement. And, worse, whether I have to work double to continue checking ideological edits of this signature. Rokus01 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

 * "Superiority" in a culture usually means "technological superiority". --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Historic referenses
Referenses from old scriptures about The slow transition from hunter and gather cultures and slash and burn shifting cultivation cultures to stationary agriculture due to the iron plow--Svedjebruk (talk) 13:55, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Machine translation from Danish?
This article is a mess. It seems to have been machine translated from Danish. The Suebians are for instance called sveberne. And someone just "corrected" latinerne -- which refers to the inhabitants of 1st millennium BC Latium -- to "Latinos"... Martin Rundkvist (talk) 16:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Note that the whole section was inserted in one fell swoop in this edit. (The rest of the article is actually fine, and even the section in question is mostly OK language-wise; I think it's only one paragraph which was machine-translated or written by a person not very competent in English, and it included "latinos" right from the start.) I am considering deleting it outright, as it strays far from the topic, but it was evidently a lot of work and added in good faith (although copyvio remains a concern), so I am hesitating (even though it would be preserved in the history).
 * I also agree that speaking of Germanic tribes in 750 BC is outdated at best, and ahistorical; this date likely precedes even the Germanic consonant shift. Never been a fan of this map, even though it is still used in other articles, such as Iron Age Scandinavia. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:05, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

 * I just realised that the off-topic section was also inserted by Svedjebruk into Iron Age, from which it was later split off (by Dbachmann) into Iron Age Europe (the split-off probably would not have happened, had the rambling section simply been deleted before). So it is a complete duplicate. At least it fits better there, but the rather questionable quality of the prose and the content make me wonder whether it might not be better off removed there as well. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Scandinavia vs. Netherlands and northern Germany
I came here to elaborate more on the pre-Roman Iron Age from a Danish (Scandinavian) view. From my sources (Jørgen Jensen and others) which is solid and credible, it appears that there is some major differences between how this era unfolded in Scandinavia and "the southern regions" (Netherlands and northern Germany). Enough differences that the article would probably benefit from a separation. Not in two separate articles, but with separate sections. I am sure there are many similarities as well of course.

I might even suspect there to be major differences within Scandinavia also. In particular because bog ore is/was only to be found in south-western Jutland in larger quantities. But I am not very knowledgeable about how the Iron Age unfolded in either Norway or Sweden at the moment.

Important differences between Scandinavia (S) and "the southern regions" (tsr):
 * Initial population decline in S. Expansion in tsr.
 * The introduction of a well established iron industry in S was very slow.

Important and deep changes in S. Not aware if the same happened in tsr:
 * A dramatic change in agricultural practices.
 * The arable land was deforested and the ecology was deeply affected. Especially in Denmark.
 * Slave workers was introduced.
 * Social changes. focus shifted from lineage (broadly) to immediate family and community.

Guess work:
 * Perhaps tsr traded more and had more contact with the central European Celtic tribes?

RhinoMind (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Northern Europe?
Perhaps northern Europe is too broad a geographical term to be of use here?

Northern Europe also includes Great Britain, Finland, The Baltic states and more. To be complete, this article should also include a treatment of Celtic and Slavic tribes as well. Is that realistic or desirable? RhinoMind (talk) 13:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Hi. I have moved a post from the article itself to TalkPage. Is this the right place to put it? RhinoMind (talk) 21:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Did you mean, Prehistoric Britain? as your example stated "Pre Roman" the article it self another USAGE of Classical Period so Not only Roman (as the statement of User:RioHondo, or Greeks plus, it is been stated as Classical period followed by "Pre-roman." ? and africa is a continent it self not a country bcoz all of the continents have been encircled by explorers, That even i can say "Pre Colonial Southeast Asia" right? . where talking about a single country  (Philipandrew2 (talk) 08:26, 8 October 2015 (UTC))

Move to Pre-Roman Iron Age of Northern Europe
That is, rightly, the bolded bit in the first line, and should be the article title. The article was originally a translation (from Dutch I think), & most of the sources are still in languages "local" to the subject. In those languages I'm sure "of Northern Europe" is generally understood, but that is not so in English, where "Pre-Roman Iron Age" is quite often used describing a whole range of regions, many nowhere near Northern Europe. If no one objects I'll move it in a few days. Johnbod (talk) 11:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. Good idea, but... Before limiting this article to Northern Europe and how the Pre-Roman Iron Age unfolded there, we need a general article on the subject. You say that a Pre-Roman Iron Age also unfolded elsewehere, outside of Northerne Europe. This kind of information would be a very good idea to put up here first. When the general information is up, we can probably proceed with a seperate article about Northern Europe specifically. RhinoMind (talk) 14:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No. We already have "a seperate article about Northern Europe specifically" here. The question is what it should be called. We have other articles on IA cultures in various places - see Iron Age Europe and articles linked from there. Johnbod (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes you are right, but where is the general article? I guess there are two equally important jobs here:

 * 1. Create a general article on the Pre-Roman Iron Age, which includes the issues that you raise in your initial post above. You have argued that other places outside of Northern Europe also had an era called Pre-Roman Iron Age. Perhaps you could provide a couple of sources on this? In the general article on the Iron Age in Europe it says specifically that this term only applies to Northern Europe. If it is not true, we need some sources and new explanations.
 * 2. Re-name and move this page as you suggest.

 * I do not think one of these could do without the other. RhinoMind (talk) 08:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If it does, then our article is wrong. Examples are very easy to find:

Journal of World Prehistory, Vol. 9, No. 1 (March 1995), pp. 47-98 - these are just the first hits on various searches. This article is ONLY about Northern Europe (narrowly defined). That is a perfectly good subject for an article, but it should be correctly titled, using the terminology found in English, not Danish. All I want to do is to bring the title in line with the contents. I really don't see the difficulty. If you want to create another article, by all means go ahead, although I think improving Iron Age Europe would be much better. Normally any local period post-Roman conquest is called "Roman", not "Iron Age" at all. Likewise medieval or later periods that are still in the "Iron Age" in terms of technology. Johnbod (talk) 12:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "The Pre-Roman Iron Age in Britain and Ireland (ca. 800 B.C. to A.D. 100): An Overview", J. D. Hill
 * Talks about Britain and France (and not Scandinavia)
 * Spain
 * Spain
 * Ireland, Britain
 * I've just noticed Roman Iron Age, which is just as crazy. Johnbod (talk) 13:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I should have added that what I am proposing is a return to the original title, before an undiscussed move by Krakkos in 2012. Johnbod (talk) 12:11, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

 * We have quite a few articles on Britain that use "Late pre-Roman Iron Age (LPRIA)", eg Prehistoric Britain. We really either need to rename this article or rewrite it. There's a plethora of sources. Doug Weller  talk 14:37, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Started an AfD for Roman Iron Age Articles for deletion/Roman Iron Age. Doug Weller  talk 15:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

 * ThatAfD was closed as consensus to keep and Move to Iron Age in northern Europe, and I am moving this is accordance.  DGG ( talk ) 18:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * the undiscussed move was poorly advised, there was grounds for discussion, but it is a good idea to get a grasp of the topic before blindly moving stuff around, it tends to not improve the situation even if the original concern was valid. The obvious merge target for this bunch of stub-like pages would be List of archaeological periods (Northern Europe), but it should be expanded to an actual article (instead of a list), e.g. Archaeology of Northern Europe. --dab (𒁳) 09:25, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, undiscussed moves are a bad idea, especially when they go against a recent consensus. Johnbod (talk) 12:37, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Chernobyl exclusion zone

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Zone of Alienation is an officially designated exclusion zone around the site of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster. It is also commonly known as the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, the 30-Kilometre Zone, or simply The Zone.

Established by the Soviet Armed Forces soon after the 1986 disaster, it initially existed as an area of 30 km radius from the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant designated for evacuation and placed under military control. Its borders have since been altered to cover a larger area of Ukraine. The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone borders a separately administered area, the Polesie State Radioecological Reserve, to the north in Belarus. The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone is managed by an agency of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, while the power plant and its sarcophagus (and replacement) are administered separately.

The Exclusion Zone covers an area of approximately 2600 km2 in Ukraine immediately surrounding the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant where radioactive contamination is highest and public access and habitation are restricted. Other areas of compulsory resettlement and voluntary relocation not part of the restricted Exclusion Zone exist in the surrounding areas and throughout Ukraine. In February 2019 it was revealed that talks were underway to redraw the boundaries of the Exclusion Zone to reflect the declining radioactivity of the Zone's outer areas.

The Exclusion Zone's purpose is to restrict access to hazardous areas, reduce the spread of radiological contamination, and conduct radiological and ecological monitoring activities. Today, the Exclusion Zone is one of the most radioactively contaminated areas in the world and draws significant scientific interest for the high levels of radiation exposure in the environment, as well as increasing interest from tourists. The zone has become a thriving sanctuary with natural flora and fauna with some of the highest biodiversity and thickest forests in all of Ukraine. This is due to the lack of human activity in the Exclusion Zone and is despite the radiation.

The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone was the site of fighting between Russian and Ukrainian forces during the capture of Chernobyl on 24 February 2022, and during its eventual liberation during a Ukrainian counterattack two months later, as part of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The exclusion zone remains closed to tourists pending the eventual cessation of hostilities in the Russo-Ukrainian War.

Geographically, it includes the northernmost part of Vyshhorod Raion (district) in Kyiv Oblast (region).

Before 1986
Historically and geographically, the zone is the heartland of the Polesia region. This predominantly rural woodland and marshland area was once home to 120,000 people living in the cities of Chernobyl and Pripyat as well as 187 smaller communities, but is now mostly uninhabited. All settlements remain designated on geographic maps but marked as нежил. (nezhyl.) – "uninhabited". The woodland in the area around Pripyat was a focal point of partisan resistance during the Second World War, which allowed evacuated residents to evade guards and return into the woods. In the woodland near the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant stood the "Partisan's Tree" or "Cross Tree", which was used to hang captured partisans. The tree fell down due to age in 1996 and a memorial now stands at its location.

10-kilometre and 30-kilometre Zones
The Exclusion Zone was established on May 2, 1986 soon after the Chernobyl disaster, when a Soviet government commission headed by Nikolai Ryzhkov decided on a "rather arbitrary"  area of a 30 km radius from Reactor 4 as the designated evacuation area. The 30 km Zone was initially divided into three subzones: the area immediately adjacent to Reactor 4, an area of approximately 10 km radius from the reactor, and the remaining 30 km zone. Protective clothing and available facilities varied between these subzones.

Later in 1986, after updated maps of the contaminated areas were produced, the zone was split into three areas to designate further evacuation areas based on the revised dose limit of 100 mSv. Special permission for access and full military control was put in place in late 1986. Although evacuations were not immediate, 91,200 people were eventually evacuated from these zones.
 * the "Black Zone" (over 200 μSv·h−1), to which evacuees were never to return
 * the "Red Zone" (50–200 μSv·h−1), where evacuees might return once radiation levels normalized
 * the "Blue Zone" (30–50 μSv·h−1), where children and pregnant women were evacuated starting in the summer of 1986

In November 1986, control over activities in the zone was given to the new production association Kombinat. Based in the evacuated city of Chernobyl, the association's responsibility was to operate the power plant, decontaminate the 30 km zone, supply materials and goods to the zone, and construct housing outside the new town of Slavutych for the power plant personnel and their families.

In March 1989, a "Safe Living Concept" was created for people living in contaminated zones beyond the Exclusion Zone in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia. In October 1989, the Soviet government requested assistance from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to assess the "Soviet Safe Living Concept" for inhabitants of contaminated areas. "Throughout the Soviet period, an image of containment was partially achieved through selective resettlements and territorial delineations of contaminated zones."

After independence

In February 1991, the law On The Legal Status of the Territory Exposed to the Radioactive Contamination resulting from the ChNPP Accident was passed, updating the borders of the Exclusion Zone and defining obligatory and voluntary resettlement areas, and areas for enhanced monitoring. The borders were based on soil deposits of strontium-90, caesium-137, and plutonium as well as the calculated dose rate (sieverts/h) as identified by the National Commission for Radiation Protection of Ukraine. Responsibility for monitoring and coordination of activities in the Exclusion Zone was given to the Ministry of Chernobyl Affairs.

In-depth studies were conducted from 1992 to 1993, culminating the updating of the 1991 law followed by further evacuations from the Polesia area. A number of evacuation zones were determined: the "Exclusion Zone", the "Zone of Absolute (Mandatory) Resettlement", and the "Zone of Guaranteed Voluntary Resettlement", as well as many areas throughout Ukraine designated as areas for radiation monitoring. The evacuation of contaminated areas outside of the Exclusion Zone continued in both the compulsory and voluntary resettlement areas, with 53,000 people evacuated from areas in Ukraine from 1990 to 1995.

After Ukrainian Independence, funding for the policing and protection of the zone was initially limited, resulting in even further settling by samosely (returnees) and other illegal intrusion.

In 1997, the areas of Poliske and Narodychi, which had been evacuated, were added to the existing area of the Exclusion Zone, and the zone now encompasses the exclusion zone and parts of the zone of Absolute (Mandatory) Resettlement of an area of approximately 2,600 km2. This Zone was placed under management of the 'Administration of the exclusion zone and the zone of absolute (mandatory) resettlement' within the Ministry of Emergencies.

On 15 December 2000, all nuclear power production at the power plant ceased after an official ceremony with then-President Leonid Kuchma when the last remaining operational reactor, number 3, was shut down.

2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone was the site of fighting between Russian and Ukrainian forces during the Battle of Chernobyl on 24 February 2022, as part of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russian forces reportedly captured the plant the same day.

Facilities at Chernobyl still require ongoing management, in part to ensure the continued cooling of spent nuclear fuel. An estimated 100 plant workers and 200 Ukrainian guards who were at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant when the Russians arrived had been unable to leave. Normally they would change shifts daily and would not live at the site. They had limited supplies of medication, food, and electricity.

According to Ukrainian reports, the radiation levels in the exclusion zone increased after the invasion. The higher levels are believed to be a result of disturbance of radioactive dust by the military activity or possibly incorrect readings caused by cyberattacks.

On 10 March, the International Atomic Energy Agency stated that it had lost all contact with Chernobyl.

On 22 March, the Ukrainian state agency responsible for the Chernobyl exclusion zone reported that Russian forces had destroyed a new laboratory at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. The laboratory, which opened in 2015, worked to improve the management of radioactive waste, among other things. "The laboratory contained highly active samples and samples of radionuclides that are now in the hands of the enemy, which we hope will harm itself and not the civilized world", the agency said in its statement.

On 27 March, Lyudmila Denisova, then–Verkhovna Rada Commissioner for Human Rights, said that 31 known individual fires covering 10,000 hectares were burning in the zone. These fires caused "...an increased level of radioactive air pollution", according to Denisova. Firefighters were unable to reach the fires due to the Russian forces in the area. These wildfires are seasonal; one fire that was 11,500 hectares in size took place in 2020, and a series of several smaller fires occurred throughout the 2010s.

On 31 March, it was reported that most of the Russian troops occupying Chernobyl withdrew. An Exclusion Zone employee made a post on Facebook suggesting that Russian troops were suffering from acute radiation sickness, based on a photo of military buses unloading near a radiation hospital in Belarus. Chernobyl operator Energoatom claimed that Russian troops had dug trenches in the most contaminated part of the Chernobyl exclusion zone, receiving "significant doses" of radiation. BBC News reported unconfirmed reports that some were being treated in Belarus.

On 3 April, Ukrainian forces retook the Chernobyl power plant.

Population

The 30-kilometre zone is estimated to be home to 197 samosely living in 11 villages as well as in the town of Chernobyl. This number is in decline, down from previous estimates of 314 in 2007 and 1,200 in 1986. These residents are senior citizens, with an average age of 63. After repeated attempts at expulsion, the authorities have accepted their presence and allowed them to stay with limited supporting services. Residence is now informally permitted by the Ukrainian government.

Approximately 3,000 people work in the Zone of Alienation on various tasks, such as the construction of the New Safe Confinement, the ongoing decommissioning of the reactors, and assessment and monitoring of the conditions in the zone. Employees do not live inside the zone, but work shifts there. Some of the workers work "4-3" shifts (four days on, three days off), while others work 15 days on and 15 days off. Other workers commute into the zone daily from Slavutych. The duration of shifts is counted strictly for reasons involving pension and healthcare. Everyone employed in the Zone is monitored for internal bioaccumulation of radioactive elements.

The town of Chernobyl, located outside of the 10-kilometre Exclusion Zone, was evacuated following the accident but now serves as a base to support the workers within the Exclusion Zone. Its amenities include administrative buildings, general stores, a canteen, a hotel, and a bus station. Unlike other areas within the Exclusion Zone, the town is actively maintained by workers, such as lawn areas being mowed and autumn leaves being collected.

Access and tourism

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and Russian invasion there were many visitors to the Exclusion Zone annually, and  daily tours  from Kyiv. In addition, multiple-day excursions can be easily arranged with Ukrainian tour operators. Most overnight tourists stay in a hotel within the town of Chernobyl, which is located within the Exclusion Zone. According to an exclusion area tour guide, as of 2017, there are approximately 50 licensed exclusion area tour guides in total, working for approximately nine companies. Visitors must present their passports when entering the Exclusion Zone and are screened for radiation when exiting, both at the 10 km checkpoint and at the 30 km checkpoint.

The Exclusion Zone can also be entered if an application is made directly to the zone administration department.

Some evacuated residents of Pripyat have established a remembrance tradition, which includes annual visits to former homes and schools. In the Chernobyl zone, there is one operating Eastern Orthodox church, St. Elijah Church. According to Chernobyl disaster liquidators, the radiation levels there are "well below the level across the zone", a fact that president of the Ukrainian Chernobyl Union Yury Andreyev considers miraculous.

The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone has been accessible to interested parties such as scientists and journalists since the zone was created. An early example was Elena Filatova's online account of her alleged solo bike ride through the zone. This gained her Internet fame, but was later alleged to be fictional, as a guide claimed Filatova was part of an official tour group. Regardless, her story drew the attention of millions to the nuclear catastrophe. After Filatova's visit in 2004, a number of papers such as The Guardian and The New York Times began to produce reports on tours to the zone.

Tourism to the area became more common after Pripyat was featured in popular video games S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Fans of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. franchise, who refer to themselves as "stalkers", often gain access to the Zone. ("The Zone" and "stalker" derive from Arkady and Boris Strugatsky's science fiction novel Roadside Picnic, which preceded the accident but which described the evacuation of part of Russia after the appearance of dangerous alien artifacts. It served as the basis for the classic film Stalker.) Prosecution of trespassers became more severe after a significant increase in trespassing in the Exclusion Zone. An article in the penal code of Ukraine was specially introduced, and horse patrols were added to protect the zone's perimeter.

In 2012, journalist Andrew Blackwell published Visit Sunny Chernobyl: And Other Adventures in the World's Most Polluted Places. Blackwell recounts his visit to the Exclusion Zone, when a guide and driver took him through the zone and to the reactor site.

On 14 April 2013, the 32nd episode of the wildlife documentary TV program River Monsters (Atomic Assassin, Season 5, Episode 1) was broadcast, featuring the host Jeremy Wade catching a wels catfish in the cooling pools of the Chernobyl power plant at the heart of the Exclusion Zone.

On 16 February 2014, an episode of the British motoring TV programme Top Gear was broadcast, featuring two of the presenters, Jeremy Clarkson and James May, driving into the Exclusion Zone.

A portion of the finale of the Netflix documentary Our Planet, released in 2019, was filmed in the Exclusion Zone. The area was used as the primary example of how quickly an ecosystem can recover and thrive in the absence of human interference.

In 2019, Chernobyl Spirit Company released Atomik Vodka, the first consumer product made from materials grown and cultivated in the exclusion zone.

On 11 April 2022, the zone administration department suspended the validity of passes that allowed access to the exclusion zone, for the duration of martial law in Ukraine.

Illegal activities
The poaching of game, illegal logging, and metal salvage have been problems within the zone. Despite police control, intruders started infiltrating the perimeter to remove potentially contaminated materials, from televisions to toilet seats, especially in Pripyat, where the residents of about 30 high-rise apartment buildings had to leave all of their belongings behind. In 2007, the Ukrainian government adopted more severe criminal and administrative penalties for illegal activities in the alienation zone, as well as reinforced units assigned to these tasks. The population of Przewalski's horse, introduced to the Exclusion Zone in 1998, has reportedly fallen since 2005 due to poaching.

Administration
In April 2011, the State Agency of Ukraine on the Exclusion Zone Management (SAUEZM) became the successor to the State Department – Administration of the exclusion zone and the zone of absolute (mandatory) resettlement according to presidential decree. The SAUEZM is, as its predecessor, an agency within the State Emergency Service of Ukraine.

Policing of the Zone is conducted by special units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine and, along the border with Belarus, by the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine.

The SAUEZM is tasked with:
 * 1) Conducting environmental and radioactivity monitoring in the zone
 * 2) Management of long-term storage and disposal of radioactive waste
 * 3) Leasing of land in the exclusion zone and the zone of absolute (mandatory) resettlement
 * 4) Administering of state funds for radioactive waste management
 * 5) Monitoring and preservation of documentation on the subject of radioactivity
 * 6) Coordination of the decommissioning of the nuclear power plant
 * 7) Maintenance of a register of persons who have suffered as a result of the disaster

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant is located inside the zone but is administered separately. Plant personnel, 3,800 workers, reside primarily in Slavutych, a specially-built remote city in Kyiv Oblast outside of the Exclusion Zone, 45 km east of the accident site.

Checkpoints
There are 11 checkpoints.
 * Dytiatky, near the village of Dytiatky
 * Stari Sokoly, near the village of Stari Sokoly
 * Zelenyi Mys, near the village of Strakholissia
 * Poliske, near the village of Chervona Zirka
 * Ovruch, near the village of Davydky, Narodychi settlement hromada, Korosten Raion
 * Vilcha, near the village of Vilkhova
 * Dibrova, near the village of Fedorivka, Kyiv Oblast
 * Benivka, near the city of Pripyat
 * The city of Pripyat itself
 * Leliv, near the city of Chernobyl
 * Paryshiv, between the city of Chernobyl and the border with Belarus (route P56)

Development and recovery projects
The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone is an environmental recovery area, with efforts devoted to remediation and safeguarding of the reactor site. At the same time, projects for wider economic and social revival of the territories around the disaster zone have been envisioned or implemented.

In November 2007, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling for "recovery and sustainable development" of the areas affected by the Chernobyl accident. Commenting on the issue, UN Development Programme officials mentioned the plans to achieve "self-reliance" of the local population, "agriculture revival" and development of ecotourism.

However, it is not clear whether such plans, made by the UN and then-President Victor Yushchenko, deal with the zone of alienation proper, or only with the other three zones around the disaster site where contamination is less intense and restrictions on the population are looser (such as the district of Narodychi in Zhytomyr Oblast).

Since 2011, tour operators have been bringing tourists inside the Exclusion Zone (illegal tours may have started even before). Tourists are accompanied by tour guides at all times and are not able to wander too far on their own due to the presence of several radioactive "hot spots". Pripyat was deemed safe for tourists to visit for a short period of time in the late 2010s, although certain precautions must be taken.

In 2016, the Ukrainian government declared the part of the exclusion zone on its territory the Chernobyl Radiation and Environmental Biosphere Reserve.

It was reported in 2016 that "A heavily contaminated area within a 10-kilometer radius" of the plant would be used for the storage of nuclear waste. The IAEA carried out a feasibility study in 2018 to assess the prospect of expanding the local waste management infrastructure.

In 2017, three companies were reported developing plans for solar farms within the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. The high feed-in tariffs offered, the availability of land, and easy access to transmission lines (which formerly ran to the nuclear power station) have all been noted as beneficial to siting a solar farm. The solar plant began operations in October 2018. In 2019, following a three-year research project into the transfer of radioactivity to crops grown in the exclusion zone conducted by scientists from UK and Ukrainian universities, one bottle of vodka using grain from the zone was produced. The vodka did not contain abnormal levels of radiation because of the distillation process. The researchers consider the production of vodka, and its sales profits, a means to aid economic recovery of the communities most adversely affected by the disaster. The project later switched to producing and exporting "Atomik" apple spirit, made from apples grown in the Narodychi District.

Radioactive contamination
The territory of the zone is polluted unevenly. Spots of hyperintensive pollution were created first by wind and rain spreading radioactive dust at the time of the accident, and subsequently by numerous burial sites for various material and equipment used in decontamination. Zone authorities pay attention to protecting such spots from tourists, scrap hunters, and wildfires, but admit that some dangerous burial sites remain unmapped, and only recorded in the memories of the (aging) Chernobyl liquidators.

Flora and fauna
There has been an ongoing scientific debate about the extent to which flora and fauna of the zone were affected by the radioactive contamination that followed the accident. As noted by Baker and Wickliffe, one of many issues is differentiating between negative effects of Chernobyl radiation and effects of changes in farming activities resulting from human evacuation.

"'Twenty-five years after the Chernobyl meltdown, the scientific community has not yet been able to provide a clear understanding of the spectrum of ecological effects created by that radiological disaster.'"

Near the facility, a dense cloud of radioactive dust killed off a large area of Scots pine trees; the rusty orange color of the dead trees led to the nickname "The Red Forest" (Рудий ліс). The Red Forest was among the world's most radioactive places; to reduce the hazard, the Red Forest was bulldozed and the highly radioactive wood was buried, though the soil continues to emit significant radiation. Other species in the same area, such as birch trees, survived, indicating that plant species may vary considerably in their sensitivity to radiation. Cases of mutant deformity in animals of the zone include partial albinism and other external malformations in swallows  and insect mutations. A study of several hundred birds belonging to 48 different species also demonstrated that birds inhabiting highly radioactively contaminated areas had smaller brains compared to birds from clean areas.

A reduction in the density and the abundance of animals in highly radioactively contaminated areas has been reported for several taxa, including birds, insects, spiders, and mammals. In birds, which are an efficient bioindicator, a negative correlation has been reported between background radiation and bird species richness. Scientists such as Anders Pape Møller (University of Paris-Sud) and Timothy Mousseau (University of South Carolina) report that birds and smaller animals such as voles may be particularly affected by radioactivity.

Møller is the first author on 9 of the 20 most-cited articles relating to the ecology, evolution and non-human biology in the Chernobyl area. However, some of Møller's research has been criticized as flawed. Prior to his work at Chernobyl, Møller was accused of falsifying data in a 1998 paper about asymmetry in oak leaves, which he retracted in 2001. In 2004, the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) reported that Møller was guilty of "scientific dishonesty". The French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) subsequently concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish either guilt or innocence. Strongly held opinions about Møller and his work have contributed to the difficulty of reaching a scientific consensus on the effects of radiation on wildlife in the Exclusion Zone.

More recently, the populations of large mammals have increased due to a significant reduction of human interference. The populations of traditional Polesian animals (such as the gray wolf, badger, wild boar, roe deer, white-tailed eagle, black stork, western marsh harrier, short-eared owl, red deer, moose, great egret, whooper swan, least weasel, common kestrel, and beaver) have multiplied enormously and begun expanding outside the zone. The zone is considered as a classic example of an involuntary park.

The return of wolves and other animals to the area is being studied by scientists such as Marina Shkvyria (National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine), Sergey Gaschak (Chernobyl Centre in Ukraine), and Jim Beasley (University of Georgia). Camera traps have been installed and are used to record the presence of species. Studies of wolves, which are concentrated in higher-radiation areas near the center of the exclusion zone, may enable researchers to better assess relationships between radiation levels, animal health, and population dynamics.

The area also houses herds of European bison (native to the area) and Przewalski's horses (foreign to the area, as the extinct tarpan was the native wild horse) released there after the accident. Some accounts refer to the reappearance of extremely rare native lynx, and there are videos of brown bears and their cubs, an animal not seen in the area for more than a century. Special game warden units are organized to protect and control them. No scientific study has been conducted on the population dynamics of these species.

The rivers and lakes of the zone pose a significant threat of spreading polluted silt during spring floods. They are systematically secured by dikes.

Grass and forest fires
It is known that fires can make contamination mobile again. In particular, V.I. Yoschenko et al. reported on the possibility of increased mobility of caesium, strontium, and plutonium due to grass and forest fires. As an experiment, fires were set and the levels of the radioactivity in the air downwind of these fires were measured.

Grass and forest fires have happened inside the contaminated zone, releasing radioactive fallout into the atmosphere. In 1986, a series of fires destroyed 2,336 ha of forest, and several other fires have since burned within the 30 km zone. A serious fire in early May 1992 affected 500 ha of land, including 270 ha of forest. This resulted in a great increase in the levels of caesium-137 in airborne dust.

In 2010, a series of wildfires affected contaminated areas, specifically the surroundings of Bryansk and border regions with Belarus and Ukraine. The Russian government claimed that there was no discernible increase in radiation levels, while Greenpeace accused the government of denial.

On 4 April 2020, a fire broke in the Zone on at least 20 hectares of Ukrainian forests. Approximately 90 firefighters were deployed to extinguish the blaze, as well as a helicopter and two aircraft. Radiation is still present in these forests, making firefighting more difficult; authorities stated that there was no danger to the surrounding population. The previous reported fire was in June 2018.

Current state of the ecosystem
Despite the negative effect of the disaster on human life, many scientists see an overall beneficial effect to the ecosystem. Though the immediate effects of the accident were negative, the area quickly recovered and is today seen as very healthy. The lack of people in the area has increased the biodiversity of the Exclusion Zone in the years since the disaster.

In the aftermath of the disaster, radioactive contamination in the air had a decidedly negative effect on the fauna, vegetation, rivers, lakes, and groundwater of the area. The radiation resulted in deaths among coniferous plants, soil invertebrates, and mammals, as well as a decline in reproductive numbers among both plants and animals.

The surrounding forest was covered in radioactive particles, resulting in the death of 400 hectares of the most immediate pine trees, though radiation damage can be found in an area of tens of thousands of hectares. An additional concern is that as the dead trees in the Red Forest (named for the color of the dead pines) decay, contamination is leaking into the groundwater.

Despite all this, Professor Nick Beresford, an expert on Chernobyl and ecology, said that "the overall effect was positive" for the wildlife in the area.

The impact of radiation on individual animals has not been studied, but cameras in the area have captured evidence of a resurgence of the mammalian population – including rare animals such as the lynx and the vulnerable European bison.

Research on the health of Chernobyl's wildlife is ongoing, and there is concern that the wildlife still suffers from some of the negative effects of the radiation exposure. Though it will be years before researchers collect the necessary data to fully understand the effects, for now, the area is essentially one of Europe's largest nature preserves. Overall, an assessment by plant biochemist Stuart Thompson concluded, "the burden brought by radiation at Chernobyl is less severe than the benefits reaped from humans leaving the area." In fact, the ecosystem around the power plant "supports more life than before".

Infrastructure
The industrial, transport, and residential infrastructure has been largely crumbling since the 1986 evacuation. There are at least 800 known "burial grounds" (Ukrainian singular: mohyl'nyk) for the contaminated vehicles with hundreds of abandoned military vehicles and helicopters. River ships and barges lie in the abandoned port of Chernobyl. The port can easily be seen in satellite images of the area. The Jupiter Factory, one of the largest buildings in the zone, was in use until 1996 but has since been abandoned and its condition is deteriorating.

The infrastructure immediately used by the existing nuclear-related installations is maintained and developed, such as the railway link to the outside world from the Semykhody station used by the power plant.

Chernobyl-2
The Chernobyl-2 site (a.k.a. the "Russian Woodpecker") is a former Soviet military installation relatively close to the power plant, consisting of a gigantic transmitter and receiver belonging to the Duga-1 over-the-horizon radar system. Located 2 km from the surface area of Chernobyl-2 is a large underground complex that was used for anti-missile defense, space surveillance and communication, and research. Military units were stationed there.

Media depictions

 * Immediately after the explosion on 26 April 1986, Russian photographer Igor Kostin photographed and reported on the event, getting the first pictures from the air, then for the next 20 years he continued visiting the area to document the political and personal stories of those impacted by the disaster, publishing a book of photos Chernobyl: confessions of a reporter.
 * In 2014, the official video for Pink Floyd's "Marooned" features scenes of the town of Pripyat.
 * In an opening scene of the 1998 film Godzilla, the main character, scientist Nick Tatopoulos, is in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, researching the effects of environmental radiation on earthworms.
 * British photographer John Darwell was among the first foreigners to photograph within the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone for three weeks in late 1999, including in Pripyat, in numerous villages, a landfill site, and people continuing to live within the Zone. This resulted in an exhibition and book Legacy: Photographs inside the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. Stockport: Dewi Lewis, 2001. ISBN 978-1-899235-58-2. Visits have since been made by numerous other documentary and art photographers.
 * In A Good Day to Die Hard, a 2013 American action thriller film, the protagonists steal a car and drive to Pripyat where a safe deposit box with a file is located, only to find many men loading containers into vehicles while instead they are supposed to only get a secret file. The safe deposit box with the supposed file is a secret passage to a Chernobyl-era vault containing €1 billion worth of weapons-grade uranium. It is turned out that there is no secret file and the antagonists have concocted a scheme to steal the uranium deposit to make big money in the black market.
 * In a 2014 episode of Top Gear, the hosts were challenged with making their cars run out of fuel before they could reach the Exclusion Zone.
 * Jeremy Wade, of the fishing documentary River Monsters, risks his life to catch a river monster that supposedly lives near or in the cooling ponds of the Chernobyl power plant near Pripyat.
 * A large fraction of Martin Cruz Smith's 2004 crime novel Wolves Eat Dogs (the fifth in his series starring Russian detective Arkady Renko) is set in the Exclusion Zone.
 * The opening scene of the 2005 horror film Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis takes place within Chernobyl, where canisters of the zombie chemical 2-4-5 Trioxin are found to be held.
 * The video game franchise S.T.A.L.K.E.R., released in 2007, recreates parts of the zone from source photographs and in-person visits (bridges, railways, buildings, compounds, abandoned vehicles), albeit taking some artistic license regarding the geography of the Zone for gameplay reasons.
 * In the 2007 video game Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, two missions, i.e. "All Ghillied Up" and "One Shot, One Kill" take place in Pripyat.
 * A 2009 episode of Destination Truth depicts Josh Gates and the Destination Truth team exploring the ruins of Pripyat for signs of paranormal activity.
 * In 2011, Guillaume Herbaut and Bruno Masi created the web documentary La Zone, funded by CNC, LeMonde.fr and Agat Films. The documentary explores the communities and individuals that still inhabit or visit the Exclusion Zone.
 * The PBS program Nature aired on 19 October 2011, its documentary Radioactive Wolves which explores the return to nature which has occurred in the Exclusion Zone among wolves and other wildlife.
 * In the 2011 film Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Chernobyl is depicted when the Autobots investigate suspected alien activity.
 * 2011: the award-winning short film Seven Years of Winter was filmed under the direction of Marcus Schwenzel in 2011. In his short film the filmmaker tells the drama of the orphan Andrej, which is sent into the nuclear environment by his brother Artjom in order to ransack the abandoned homes. In 2015 the film received the Award for Best Film from the Uranium International Film Festival.
 * The 2012 film Chernobyl Diaries is set in the Exclusion Zone. The horror movie follows a tour group that become stranded in Pripyat, and their encounters with creatures mutated by radioactive exposure.
 * The 2015 documentary The Russian Woodpecker, which won the Grand Jury Prize for World Documentary at the Sundance Film Festival, has extensive footage from the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone and focuses on a conspiracy theory behind the disaster and the nearby Duga radar installation.
 * Markiyan Kamysh's 2015 book, Stalking the Atomic City: Life Among the Decadent and the Depraved of Chornobyl, about illegal pilgrimage in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.
 * The 2015 documentary The Babushkas Of Chernobyl directed by Anne Bogart and Holly Morris focuses on elderly residents who remain in the Exclusion Zone. These people, a majority of whom are women, are self-sufficient farmers who receive routine visits from officials to check on their health and radiation levels. The film won several awards.
 * The five-part HBO miniseries Chernobyl was aired in 2019, dramatizing the events of the explosion and relief efforts after the fact. It was primarily shot in Lithuania.
 * In 2019, the Spintires video game released a DLC where players can drive around the Exclusion Zone behind the wheel of a Russian truck to hunt down prize logging sites, while also trying to avoid getting blasted by radiation. The power plant, Pripyat, Red Forest, Kupsta Lake and the Duga Radar have all been recreated, so players can also go on a sightseeing tour from the truck.
 * The survival horror video game Chernobylite by The Farm 51 is set in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.
 * In Chris Tarrant: Extreme Railways Season 5 Episode - "Extreme Nuclear Railway: A Journey Too Far?" (episode 22), Chris Tarrant visits Chernobyl on his journey through Ukraine.

News and publications

 * Wildlife defies Chernobyl radiation - by BBC News, 20 April 2006
 * Radioactive Wolves - by PBS Documentary aired in the U.S. on Oct, 19 2011
 * Inside the Forbidden Forests 1993 The Guardian article about the zone
 * The zone as a wildlife reserve

Images from inside the Zone

 * ChernobylGallery.com - Photographs of Chernobyl and Pripyat
 * Lacourphotos.com - Pripyat in Wintertime (Urban photos)
 * Images from inside the Zone

title: Chernobyl exclusion zone


text:
Kevin Butler

Kevin Butler may refer to:
 * Kevin Butler (American football) (born 1962), American football placekicker
 * Kevin Butler (character), fictional character in Sony's PlayStation 3 marketing campaigns
 * Kevin Butler (streetball player), aka "Bizness", American streetball player

title: Kevin Butler


text:
Sadamichi Hirasawa

Sadamichi Hirasawa (平沢 貞通) was a Japanese tempera painter. He was convicted of mass poisoning and sentenced to death. Due to strong suspicions that he was innocent, no justice minister ever signed his death warrant.

Teigin case
On January 26, 1948, a man calling himself an epidemiologist arrived at a branch of the Imperial Bank (Teikoku Ginkō, aka Teigin) in Shiinamachi, a suburb of Toshima, Tokyo, shortly before closing time. He explained that he was a public health official sent by US occupation authorities who had orders to inoculate the staff against a sudden outbreak of dysentery. He gave each of the sixteen people present a pill and a few drops of liquid. Those present drank the liquid he gave, which was later thought to be "nitrile hydrocyanide" (青酸ニトリール), an assassination toxicant originally developed at the Noborito Laboratory. When all were incapacitated, the robber took some money lying on the desks, which amounted to 160,000 yen (about $2,000 US at the time), but left the majority behind, leaving his motive unknown. Ten of the victims died at the scene (one was a child of an employee) and two others died while hospitalized.

Arrest and trial
Hirasawa was caught by the police due to the Japanese habit of exchanging business cards with personal details. There had been two other extremely similar cases of attempted and actual theft at banks via the use of poison in the weeks and months before the robbery. In all cases the poisoner, a lone male, left a business card. The poisoner used a card which was marked "Jirō Yamaguchi" in one of the two incidents, but it was later found that said Yamaguchi did not exist: the card was a fake. The poisoner also used a real card which was marked "Shigeru Matsui" (of the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Department of Disease Prevention) in another of the two incidents. The original owner of the card was found to have an alibi. Matsui told the police that he had exchanged cards with 593 people, but of these, 100 were of the type used in the poisoning incidents, of which eight remained in his possession. Matsui recorded the time and place of the business card exchange on the back of cards he received so the police set out to trace the remaining 92 cards. 62 cards were retrieved and their originators cleared; a further 22 were deemed to have been irrelevant to the case. One of the remaining 8 cards was received by Hirasawa. The police were led to arrest Hirasawa because:
 * 1) He could not produce the card he had received from Matsui. Hirasawa claimed to have lost the business card, together with his wallet, due to his having been the victim of pickpocketing.
 * 2) A similar amount of money to that stolen from the bank was found in Hirasawa's possession, the origin of which he refused to divulge. The origin of the money is unknown to this day (though some, such as the crime fiction novelist Seichō Matsumoto, suggested Hirasawa received it by drawing pornographic pictures, a side business that would have been detrimental to Hirasawa's reputation as an artist).
 * 3) Hirasawa's alibi of having been taking a stroll in the vicinity of the crime scene could be neither verified nor substantiated.
 * 4) Hirasawa was identified as the poisoner by several witnesses (but only by two survivors, and see picture below).
 * 5) He confessed to having been involved in four previous cases of bank fraud (recanted together with his subsequent confession).

He was arrested on August 21, 1948. After police interrogation, which allegedly involved torture, Hirasawa confessed, but then recanted soon after. His later defence against his confession was based on partial insanity, alleging that he had been troubled with Korsakoff's syndrome (as a result of rabies inoculation) and so his confession was not reliable. The court, however, disagreed and Hirasawa was sentenced to death in 1950. Until 1949, a confession was solid evidence under the law, even if the police tortured a person to extract said confession. The Supreme Court of Japan upheld the death sentence in 1955. His attorneys tried to have the sentence revoked, submitting 18 pleas for retrial over the following years.

Doubt over guilty verdict
He was sentenced to death, but there was originally no conclusive evidence. In addition, although 40 employees saw the crimes, there were only two people who identified him as the criminal. Seichō Matsumoto presumed that the true culprit was a former member of Unit 731 in his books A story of the Teikoku Bank Incident in 1959 and The Black Fog of Japan in 1960. Matsumoto also suspected that "the money of unknown origin" came from selling pornographic drawings. Kei Kumai protested Hirasawa's conviction with his film Teigin jiken: Shikeishû (Teijin Incident: Condemned / The Long Death) in 1964.

Successive Ministers of Justice in Japan did not sign his death warrant, so the death sentence was never carried out. Even Isaji Tanaka, who on 13 October 1967 announced in front of the press that he had signed the death warrants of 23 prisoners in one go, did not sign Hirasawa's death warrant, stating that he doubted Hirasawa's guilt.

The poison was regarded as the readily obtainable potassium cyanide in Hirasawa's trial. One of the reasons given to doubt Hirasawa's guilt is because the victims' symptoms were clearly different from potassium cyanide poisoning, which is rapid. Keio University's contemporary investigation claimed that the true poison may have been acetone cyanohydrin, a military poison deliberately designed to be slow-acting, which Hirasawa could not have obtained.

Death in prison
Hirasawa remained in prison as a condemned criminal for the next 32 years. He spent his time painting and writing his autobiography My Will: the Teikoku Bank Case (遺書 帝銀事件).

In 1981, Makoto Endo became the leader of Hirasawa's lawyers. Beside this case, he took part in controversial trials such as that of Norio Nagayama. The defense claimed that statute of limitations for his death penalty ran out in 1985. The death penalty has a 30-year statute of limitations under the Criminal Code of Japan, and so Endo appealed for his release. However, the Japanese court refused this argument, pointing out that the statute only applies in the case if a death row inmate escapes from prison and evades capture for 30 years. Japanese courts judge that the punishment begins when the minister signs the death warrant, which had never been done. His health deteriorated in 1987. On April 30, 1987, Amnesty International petitioned the Japanese government to release him, but Hirasawa died of pneumonia in a prison hospital on May 10.

Bids for a posthumous retrial
Even after Hirasawa's death, his son by adoption, Takehiko Hirasawa, tried to clear his name. Takehiko was the son of one of Sadamichi's supporters; he became the painter's adopted son while in university to take up the task of getting a retrial for Sadamichi, as his relatives were reluctant to pursue the case due to social prejudice. Takehiko also worked to recover several of Sadamichi's lost paintings and held exhibitions of his work. He and his lawyers submitted a 19th plea for retrial; Sadamichi's brain damage was also proved. , his lawyers had submitted new evidence to attempt to prove Hirasawa's innocence.

In September 2013, Takehiko Hirasawa died alone at his home in Suginami Ward, Tokyo, aged 54; he had lived there with his natural mother until her death at age 83 the previous December. His body was only found on 16 October by several retrial supporters who had worried about not hearing from him in some time. According to supporters, the pressures and uncertainties surrounding the reopening of the case, together with his mother's death, had caused Takehiko to periodically display signs of instability and doubts about whether he could continue. He continued to persist with his objective of getting a posthumous retrial, though - writing after his mother's death on a website about the "Teigin Incident":

"It was her wish and mine and my late father’s to mark in history that Sadamichi Hirasawa is innocent. I will continue this struggle for years to come." At the time of Takehiko's death, he and his lawyers had assembled a team of psychologists to reexamine the witness accounts and investigation process from the trial, to determine if the evidence was credible by present standards. They had been scheduled to submit their position papers to the Tokyo High Court by the end of 2013, ahead of the court verdict on the retrial petition.

On 4 December 2013, the Tokyo High Court announced it would drop the plea for a posthumous retrial for Sadamichi Hirasawa following his adopted son's death. As a result, the court effectively declared the case closed, unless other members of the Hirasawa family wish to pursue a retrial.

In popular culture
A 2009 novel, Occupied City by English author David Peace, who was long a resident in Japan, is based on the Hirasawa case. The case is also referenced in Ian Fleming's 11th James Bond novel, You Only Live Twice (1964), though embellished and exaggerated.

In 1964, Nikkatsu released Teigin jiken: Shikeishû (Teijin Incident: Condemned / The Long Death), a docudrama-style recounting of the case. Directed by Kei Kumai, the film provided actor Kinzō Shin with a rare starring role as Hirasawa.

title: Sadamichi Hirasawa


text:
Talk:Satiric misspelling

"@ replacing A, at, or O" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect @ replacing A, at, or O and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 3 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

'z' replacing 's'
I've seen z used to replace s in Russian -> Ruzzian in reference to the Z symbol often painted on Russian vehicles. Dominic 41 (talk) 17:56, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Car replacing Cat
this is generally in informal internet speak. It looks like it was originally an actual misspelling by 1 person that took off like wildfire.

Im on mobile and have no idea how to format it, so Im leaving it as a talk topic. - ShowierData9979 (Cant be bothered to create an account right now) 47.220.165.238 (talk) 07:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

 * https://www.reddit.com/r/cats/comments/19caz0k/why_has_it_become_so_common_to_see_car_instead_of/ 47.220.165.238 (talk) 08:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Satiric misspelling


text: Category:Thai politicians

title: Category:Thai politicians


text:
Therese Grankvist

Therese Grankvist (born 2 May 1977) is a Swedish singer and songwriter. She started recording in 1997 under the Drömhus alias, and goes by Therese since the release of her single "Monkey" in 2002. She may be best known for her internationally successful collaborations with Swedish DJ and producer StoneBridge, "Put 'Em High" and "Take Me Away", released on Hed Kandi in 2004.

Therese started her own label Vixon Records in 2014.

Early life
Therese Grankvist spent her childhood in Nässjö, Sweden. She later moved to Tullinge (near Stockholm) at the age of 13.

1997–2000: Drömhus and Melodifestivalen
Therese's career started when she called a record company and recorded her singing on their answering machine. When she later met Dr. Alban, he convinced her to join the new eurodance project Drömhus. At first, Drömhus was meant to consist of two men and Therese, but eventually shrank to just Therese and the producers.

In 1997, Drömhus's first single "Du och jag" ("You and I") was released. The big breakthrough, however, came in 1998 with the single "Vill ha dig" ("Want You"), a cover of a hit by the band Freestyle in the 1980s.

In 1999, Drömhus competed in the Melodifestivalen, the Swedish national selection for Eurovision Song Contest, with the song "Stjärna på himmelen" ("Star in the Sky"). It finished second, thus not qualifying for the Eurovision Song Contest. In 2000, Therese announced that she would leave Drömhus to perform under the mononym Therese instead.

2001–2004: Acapulco and work with StoneBridge
Therese's first singles, "Monkey" and "I Need Somebody", were released in 2002, in advance of her debut album Acapulco, released early 2003 on Swedish record label Tretiak. It was her first album released under the alias Therese, containing elements of electronica, house and breakbeat, and was produced by Klas B Wahl and Swedish DJ and producer StoneBridge. Late 2003, Therese released the track "Time". It was released on Robbins Entertainment in the US in 2004.

In 2004, Therese collaborated with StoneBridge on two house tracks, "Put 'Em High" and "Take Me Away", both released on record label Hed Kandi in the UK. Especially "Put 'Em High" was a remarkable success, with the track also featured on Hed Kandi's greatest hits collection Hed Kandi: Ibiza 10 Years in 2012.

2005–2009: Multiple non-album releases
In 2005, Therese co-wrote and provided backing vocals for Dannii Minogue's "Perfection" which was produced by the Soul Seekerz.

Grankvist, together with The Attic, competed with the song "The Arrival" at Melodifestivalen 2007 on 17 February 2007 for the opportunity to represent Sweden in the Eurovision Song Contest 2007 in Helsinki, Finland. They ended 7th place in Heat 3, not qualifying for the final of Melodifestivalen.

Therese released a new single, "Feelin' Me", in the UK on Positiva Records in May 2007. The track was produced by Digital Dog and came with remixes by Thomas Gold and Armand Van Helden, amongst others. The B-side was produced by Thomas Gold, titled "How Do You Wanna?".

On 2 June 2007, Therese, featuring The Attic, performed their single "The Arrival" on Sommarkrysset, a Swedish TV show that airs in summer. She again appeared on Sommarkrysset in August 2007, together with Danny Saucedo performing the song "If Only You" from Danny's album.

Furthermore, Grankvist provided vocals for "Another Love" by The Mac Project in 2008 and "Neon Lights" by Elek-Tro Junkies in 2009. She also released the track "Shed My Skin" on Lifted House/disco:wax in Denmark in 2009.

2010–present: Missing Disco and Vixon Records
On 28 May 2010, Therese released a new single in Sweden, titled "Drop It Like It's Hot", featuring elements of electro, tribal house and dance-pop. A B-side, "Say It (In the Morning)", and remixes by the Wideboys and Alesso were released as well, with the latter eventually featured on the second album, Missing Disco. In 2011, at the pre-listening party of Lady Gaga's Born This Way album in Stockholm, Therese performed a mashup of "Drop It Like It's Hot" and Lady Gaga's "Born This Way".

In 2011, "Remedy" was released as the second single from Missing Disco. It was re-released in the UK in 2014 with new remixes by Seamus Haji, DANK and Papercha$er, amongst others. This marked the first release on Therese's own label Vixon Records, founded in 2014.

Early 2015, the title track off the album, "Missing Disco", was released as the third single, featuring an extended version as well as remixes by Rich B & Phil Marriott, Chris Henry, Phonetix and Gordon John. The track and remixes premiered on Therese's SoundCloud page.

Originally set for a late 2011 release, Missing Disco was released on 10 May 2015.

Charitable work
Therese undertakes charity work for two charities.

Discography

 * Studio albums
 * Acapulco (2003)

title: Therese Grankvist


text: Category:Thai musicians

title: Category:Thai musicians