Talk:Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Iran High‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Middle East Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force

You are an administrator, so you may disregard the message below.
You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If administrator}}. You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page: .ECR-edit-request-warning { display: none; }

Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request

This page is related to a topic subject to the extended-confirmed restriction. You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a contentious topic.

The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:

All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion. Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours (except in limited circumstances)
You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)

Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Pronunciation?

What is the correct pronunciation of "Fordow"? --GDK (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

فردو approx. = fordo The "w" in "Fordow" confuses journalists and politicians (Similar mistake with "Moscow"). It phonetically denotes lip-rounding.

Rhymes with "crow", "low", "flow", "blow".

Edit: The following youTube interview with an Iranian official will clarify matters.

"Amanpour asks Iranian official how they will respond if US strikes nuclear facilities"

--CNN, youTube, timestamp: 5:06

It's hard to be certain if his pitch on the first syllable is prosodic phrase-stress or the word's itself, or if there is also amplitude-stress on the ultima, ie:Fórdo. Farsi typically stresses the final syllable of nouns. Amanpour herself, who grew up in Tehran until the age of 11 most emphatically stresses the ultima: For-do , timestamp 4:16 , ibid.

JohndanR (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Location

The Haaretz article does say 20mi NE of Qom however the village of Fordo is NOT NE but almost due South a little over 20mi (~35km). I'll note it here, maybe others can find another source. There is an AP image of the site so perhaps someone could match the location from imaging one way or another and cite that? This location which does match the image in the Haaretz article [1] is NE of Qom at 34.8849395,50.9954145 Fordo is South at 34.26, 50.903611 Phil (talk) 01:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

correction of my earlier edit: after comparison of media imagery with remote sensing of Google Earth) it is in fact 25 km NNE of Qom IanBowie (talk) 09:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wording

Is “demolished” technically accurate? 77.99.210.120 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Was...," "Demolished..." It's way too early for such words, IMO. 2001:569:51DF:E400:581B:F401:6D04:9618 (talk) 01:15, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 22 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Description of suggested change:

Diff:

IanBowie (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google Earth shows this clearly (in comparison of infrastructure with media imagery) as 25 km NNE of Qom [as 'Qom uranium enrichment plant']

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Day Creature (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change verb tenses from 'is' to 'was'. The plant doesn't exist anymore. MAGA2016 (talk) 12:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done You might think the U.S. President's statement that the site was "completely obliterated" is sufficient, but it is not so for Wikipedia. We would need multiple reliable sources, some time after analysis had been complete, confirming this. For a good skeptical take on the current state of (public) knowledge, see Nick Paton Walsh's post-strike piece in CNN which says in the lead paragraph "the most important question is at least a 'known unknown' – that is, what remains" of this site and the others in Iran. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very true after all it is an entire mountain. Its hard to generate the Joules needed to destroy.

“To destroy a mountain, it would take approximately 10^17 to 10^18 joules, which is equivalent to 24-240 megatons of TNT.”

-Gemini Ai 2601:3C5:8180:31D0:B89D:C65C:25D5:8FD5 (talk) 20:26, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't believe everything an AI tells you. The mountain need not be vaporized. Have a look at tired mountain syndrome; much less than that is required to "destroy" it geologically. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:49, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ai is not 100% factual but neither is most militaries. you forgot a lot of information on how powerful our weapons come from Action movies and Anime. Our weapons are not like what you see on Dragonball Z. I hope you know that. Also, even the Pentagon says only a tactical nuke can fully destroy ithttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/19/trump-caution-on-iran-strike-linked-to-doubts-over-bunker-buster-bomb-officials-say.2601:3C5:8180:31D0:D915:16F:245C:1E2F (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stuxnet

Uranium enrichment infrastructure at Fordow was attacked by Stuxnet. This should be noted. Plenty of sources, e.g. https://www.darkreading.com/perimeter/stuxnet-part-of-widespread-cyber-intrusion-of-iranian-infrastructure-new-film-claims RememberOrwell (talk) 03:31, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 23 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Description of suggested change:

The Fordow Uranium Enrichment Plant is not related to the village of Fordo, as it is 100 km away.

Diff:

159.242.105.141 (talk) 14:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Referentis (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I do understand what you mean, but there is nothing we can do here, as the quoted text says "Fordo" and not Fordow. Also other sources sometimes use Fordo instead of Fordow. To make matters worse, in Fordo it says: "Also romanized as Fordow". So it seems that there is a village and a plant with the same name that are not related. I checked and as far as I can see, we do not wikilink to the village in this article. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 09:10, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 June 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change is to was when speaking of the building. Ex. "Was an Iranian Fuel Enrichment..." 2600:1009:B004:71E6:154:C98:32D:6472 (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The extent of the damage to the plant is not yet clear; it is much too soon to begin referring to it in the past tense. Day Creature (talk) 01:44, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump fairy tales

Why are there Trump fairy tales in the article and nothing about the Defence Intelligence Agency report? Falkmart (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added reference to leaked DIA preliminary assessment of more modest result.NPguy (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]