This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mlm42. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I like the neat table you made. Great job! :-) --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 19:58, 16 August 2005 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2005-08-16T19:58:00.000Z","author":"Spinboy","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Spinboy-2005-08-16T19:58:00.000Z-List_of_universities_in_Ontario","replies":[]}}-->

2006 Winter Olympics diploma count has been nominated for deletion. Discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Winter Olympics diploma count. NickelShoe 23:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-03-06T23:40:00.000Z","author":"NickelShoe","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-NickelShoe-2006-03-06T23:40:00.000Z-Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion\/2006_Winter_Olympics_diploma_count","replies":[]}}-->

I just wanted to apologize for accusing you of something when you didn't deserve it; perhaps i didn't fully understand your impressively unrelated analogies to explain the situation.. phases of jupiter? hungarians who's name begins with J? halitosis? that's what i call left field! hehe :) Mlm42 16:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-03-07T16:46:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mlm42-2006-03-07T16:46:00.000Z-olympic_diploma_discussion","replies":["c-Wknight94-2006-03-07T16:52:00.000Z-Mlm42-2006-03-07T16:46:00.000Z"]}}-->

Well I guess that's the point I'm trying to make - that the data being shown is at such a granular "left field" level as to be of very little practical use. Why not go all the way and show a total of everyone from Slovenia that finished 43rd in different events? At some point it will simply become a random jumble of numbers that has no bearing on anything and thereby reduces the credibility of Wikipedia. Hence my vote... —Wknight94 (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-03-07T16:52:00.000Z","author":"Wknight94","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Wknight94-2006-03-07T16:52:00.000Z-Mlm42-2006-03-07T16:46:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, I am not certain if you noticed, but there is a discussion already going on about the picture in Expedition 12. Please contribute there before making changes. Thank you. Chuck 09:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-03-30T09:21:00.000Z","author":"Chcknwnm","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Chcknwnm-2006-03-30T09:21:00.000Z-Expedition_12","replies":[],"displayName":"Chuck"}}-->

Hey. So I've been buzzing about some of the Mars surface feature articles and noticed you doing the same. I've created four over the last two days and of course there's dozens more on the List of Valles on Mars and List of Chasmata on Mars pages. First, though I thought I'd start with the larger regions. I added Category:Terrae on Mars and a List of Terrae on Mars, derived from Google Mars. You can follow some red-links there if you like. For the sake of uniformity, I'd suggest:

• Lat and long from Google or the THEMIS descriptions to which Google links.
• The area (presented as ex. 2500 km squared).
• Naming data, including year and source.
• Most can probably take pics, given the plethora of NASA stuff.

I have one vexing problem tho. I was under the impression that currently Martian longitude runs from 0-360°, East only. Google uses 0-180°, both East and West. Some of the research papers I've briefly glanced at also use West and it used to be 0-360° West only. I'm following Google for now, rather than subtracting the western coordinates from 360 and listing it all as East. However, we need to be uniform.

Finally, I missed the debate on moving from Topography to Surface features (I actually started the former). I'm not sure if this best, as it replaces a subject with objects; inter-wiki links show geography or topography as titles, for example. While specific things like rocks and craters may work better under surface features, broad areas like Tharsis or Arabia Terra are basically topographical regions, not individual features. Of course, this may be semantic quibbling. Cheers and let me know any ideas. Marskell 11:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-05-01T11:16:00.000Z","author":"Marskell","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Marskell-2006-05-01T11:16:00.000Z-Surface_features_on_Mars","replies":["c-Marskell-2006-05-01T16:06:00.000Z-Marskell-2006-05-01T11:16:00.000Z"]}}-->

I'll bring up my points on the Wikiproject, thanks. Re what is and is not notable: we have 33 craters at present, and if those are notable than the valles and canyons are as well. Of course this raises a scaleability concern, as Google Mars has 800. The terrae definitely belong. They're basically continent sized areas; if anything they'd be the merge target for smaller objects. One possibility is making intermediate subjects, Valles of the Arabia Terra, for instance. I've brought up this general question on the wiki project. As for the name of the cat, I suppose we'll have to disagree. Cheers and thx for getting back to me, Marskell 16:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-05-01T16:06:00.000Z","author":"Marskell","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Marskell-2006-05-01T16:06:00.000Z-Marskell-2006-05-01T11:16:00.000Z","replies":["c-Marskell-2006-05-02T06:11:00.000Z-Marskell-2006-05-01T16:06:00.000Z"]}}-->

Judging from this Category:Craters on the Moon, where well into the thousands of craters are listed, Wiki tendency to this point is to simply give an article for everything that's named... --Marskell 06:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-05-02T06:11:00.000Z","author":"Marskell","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Marskell-2006-05-02T06:11:00.000Z-Marskell-2006-05-01T16:06:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Laika has had a lot of work: can you have a fresh look here. Thanks, Sandy 00:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-09-30T00:26:00.000Z","author":"SandyGeorgia","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-SandyGeorgia-2006-09-30T00:26:00.000Z-Laika","replies":[],"displayName":"Sandy"}}-->

Please stop incorrectly categorising the spaceflight articles in the wikipedia immediately. WolfKeeper 16:26, 4 October 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-10-04T16:26:00.000Z","author":"Wolfkeeper","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Wolfkeeper-2006-10-04T16:26:00.000Z-Recategorising_the_wikipedia_considered_harmful","replies":[]}}-->

Thanks for uploading Image:Ottawa Coat of Arms.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jkelly 20:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-10-11T20:17:00.000Z","author":"Jkelly","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jkelly-2006-10-11T20:17:00.000Z-Image_copyright_problem_with_Image:Ottawa_Coat_of_Arms.jpg","replies":[]}}-->

Sounds good to me. Makes sense, too. I was always a little put off by the breakdown of information. It never quite sat right and I couldn't figure out why. This approach makes good headway i reckon. I don't have tons of time to contribute lately, but I will pop in and take a look from time to time and help out when I can. Cheers, --Exodio 23:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-10-14T23:45:00.000Z","author":"Exodio","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Exodio-2006-10-14T23:45:00.000Z-Renaming_Space_Portals_&_Other_Stuff","replies":["c-Exodio-2006-11-05T16:18:00.000Z-Exodio-2006-10-14T23:45:00.000Z"]}}-->

• No worries on the location, either. I started working on this stuff and tried to put a lot of structure into what what basicaly structureless. I'm glad someone else is cleaning up and trying to make it better. --Exodio 16:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-11-05T16:18:00.000Z","author":"Exodio","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Exodio-2006-11-05T16:18:00.000Z-Exodio-2006-10-14T23:45:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

An image you uploaded, Image:Coat of Arms of Universite de Sherbrooke.jpg, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 15:26, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. It has been suggested that the project "Martian geography" be rename to "Mars" in order to increase its scope and increase its usefulness. If you have an opinion concering this, could you leave it on the talk page, or on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Space/Reorganisation? Thanks. Lunokhod 22:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-02-25T22:09:00.000Z","author":"Lunokhod","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Lunokhod-2007-02-25T22:09:00.000Z-Martian_geography_project_proposed_rename","replies":[]}}-->

Hi, could the template Template:WikiProject Martian Geography/Members be deleted? I don't see anything using it? sbandrews 11:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-08T11:58:00.000Z","author":"Sbandrews","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sbandrews-2007-03-08T11:58:00.000Z-template","replies":["c-Mlm42-2007-03-12T18:34:00.000Z-Sbandrews-2007-03-08T11:58:00.000Z"]}}-->

The redirect seems fine. Mlm42 18:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-12T18:34:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2007-03-12T18:34:00.000Z-Sbandrews-2007-03-08T11:58:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Sorry, like the new banner :) sbandrews (t) 19:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-12T19:13:00.000Z","author":"Sbandrews","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sbandrews-2007-03-12T19:13:00.000Z-oops","replies":[]}}-->

That's what me thinks, anyway. Artie p 09:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-15T09:29:00.000Z","author":"Artie p","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Artie_p-2007-03-15T09:29:00.000Z-Enforcement_of_abritrarily-chosen_rules_of_language_=_dumb","replies":[]}}-->

As the assessment templates are currently written, most people will ask questions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Space (the first project that they will see listed) before they go to the other WikiProjects. Is that what is desired here? I do not know if everyone would agree. I would rather see the other projects listed first and WikiProject listed last in the template (as another icon). Dr. Submillimeter 17:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-21T17:57:00.000Z","author":"Dr. Submillimeter","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dr._Submillimeter-2007-03-21T17:57:00.000Z-Comment_on_assessment_templates","replies":[]}}-->

I hacked a bit on Template:Top-importance n and its kin to change the wording on WPSpace banners related to Space exploration importance. I don't yet fully understand the features available in whatever macro-expansion language it is that these templates use. Please let me know if I've done something stupid! Sdsds 01:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-03-31T01:05:00.000Z","author":"Sdsds","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sdsds-2007-03-31T01:05:00.000Z-Template:Top-importance_n","replies":[]}}-->

Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of Arms of Universite de Sherbrooke.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-05-16T17:06:00.000Z","author":"BetacommandBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-BetacommandBot-2007-05-16T17:06:00.000Z-Fair_use_rationale_for_Image:Coat_of_Arms_of_Universite_de_Sherbrooke.jpg","replies":[],"displayName":"Bot"}}-->

Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of Arms of Universite de Sherbrooke.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-05-16T17:06:00.000Z","author":"BetacommandBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-BetacommandBot-2007-05-16T17:06:00.000Z-Unspecified_source_for_Image:Coat_of_Arms_of_Universite_de_Sherbrooke.jpg","replies":[],"displayName":"Bot"}}-->

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of Arms of Universite de Sherbrooke.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-06-02T06:25:00.000Z","author":"BetacommandBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-BetacommandBot-2007-06-02T06:25:00.000Z-Non-free_use_disputed_for_Image:Coat_of_Arms_of_Universite_de_Sherbrooke.jpg","replies":[]}}-->

Thanks for uploading Image:Coat of Arms of Universite de Sherbrooke.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-15T20:43:00.000Z","author":"BetacommandBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-BetacommandBot-2007-12-15T20:43:00.000Z-Orphaned_non-free_media_(Image:Coat_of_Arms_of_Universite_de_Sherbrooke.jpg)","replies":[]}}-->

Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Space missions WikiProject. A couple of weeks ago, I proposed that the Space missions and Space travellers projects, which both appear to be inactive be merged into the Human Spaceflight project. Whilst this is being done, the capitalisation of the Human spaceflight project's title would also be corrected (ie. Human Spaceflight → Human spaceflight). The projects are all doing the same/very similar things, and in my opinion, a single, larger, project would be more effective than three smaller, and somewhat inactive projects.. In light of very little response to messages on the project talk pages, I am now sending this message to all members of all three projects, inviting them to discuss the proposal on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page. I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thanks. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-01-28T22:26:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2008-01-28T22:26:00.000Z-Space_missions_WikiProject","replies":[],"displayName":"User Page"}}-->

Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of space exploration. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 11:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-08-18T11:31:00.000Z","author":"U5K0","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-U5K0-2008-08-18T11:31:00.000Z-A_new_task_force_-_ESA","replies":[]}}-->

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Talk:International Space Station#The Failed FAC. Thank you. Colds7ream (talk) 22:32, 29 January 2009 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-01-29T22:32:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2009-01-29T22:32:00.000Z-International_Space_Station","replies":[]}}-->

Hi. I just wanted to say that I agree with your suggested move. Thanks. --Acntx (talk) 19:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-09-03T19:23:00.000Z","author":"Acntx","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Acntx-2009-09-03T19:23:00.000Z-Re:_Zanzibari_heads_of_government","replies":[]}}-->

Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, or who has contributed to the article recently, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Featured Article Candidacy with any suggestions you have for article improvements (and being bold and making those changes), whether or not you feel any issues you have previously raised have been dealt with, and, ultimately, if you believe the article meets the Featured Article guidelines. This is the fourth FAC for this article, and it'd be great to have it pass. Many thanks in advance, Colds7ream (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-12-07T16:46:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2009-12-07T16:46:00.000Z-ISS_FAC4.","replies":[]}}-->

Can you help me out? Please click here and see the comments from • ɔ ∫ →. Please answer it at my talk page. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 11:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-04-23T11:10:00.000Z","author":"Extra999","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Extra999-2010-04-23T11:10:00.000Z-Tabs","replies":[]}}-->

I have no problems, but nice astronomy articles are difficult to find, the same goes with pictures and already may of them have gone selected. Therefore, it would very difficult to maintain but I have no problem if we cooperate and maintain that. --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 01:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-08-05T01:16:00.000Z","author":"Extra999","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Extra999-2010-08-05T01:16:00.000Z-Reply","replies":["c-Extra999-2010-08-05T01:58:00.000Z-Extra999-2010-08-05T01:16:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Extra 999"}}-->

Thanks. --Extra 999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 01:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-08-05T01:58:00.000Z","author":"Extra999","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Extra999-2010-08-05T01:58:00.000Z-Extra999-2010-08-05T01:16:00.000Z","replies":[],"displayName":"Extra 999"}}-->

The article Expedition 1 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Expedition 1 for things which need to be addressed. --GW… 10:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-08-17T10:42:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-08-17T10:42:00.000Z-Your_GA_nomination_of_Expedition_1","replies":[],"displayName":"G"}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Talk:Expedition 1/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• Another one --GW… 20:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-10-05T20:27:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-10-05T20:27:00.000Z-Your_GA_nomination_of_Expedition_1","replies":["c-Wizardman-2010-10-29T03:12:00.000Z-GW_Simulations-2010-10-05T20:27:00.000Z"],"displayName":"G"}}-->

Hey, just noting that I've finished my review of it. Once those issues are fixed, the article can be passed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-10-29T03:12:00.000Z","author":"Wizardman","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Wizardman-2010-10-29T03:12:00.000Z-GW_Simulations-2010-10-05T20:27:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human spaceflight.
Message added 14:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

...and again. :-) Colds7ream (talk) 21:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-10-31T21:25:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-10-31T21:25:00.000Z-Talkback","replies":[]}}-->

I knew this issue would come up eventually, and I've seen you've taken the initiative and created what I assume will be the first of many articles on the Soviet space expeditions. When I added a lot of content to the 70s Soyuz missions, my main sources from circa 1990 almost never referred to expedition numbers, but to the crews as Soyuz xx crews even though after 1977 they often landed in a different craft.

But it seems from 1995 and the involvement of Nasa, expedition numbers started to be used (at least by Nasa) more frequently. So... there is a lot of work to do here, as none of the other Salyut 6 and Salyut 7 missions have been done... The Mir ones are largely there, as are the ISS...

Since you've started this, I will, when I eventually get to updating the missions for the 1980s (and if no one else beats me to the punch), try to create or expand the pages with the Soyuz craft as simply launch vehicles, the expeditions as the main place where mission activities are to be found. Cheers. Canada Jack (talk) 23:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-01T23:03:00.000Z","author":"Canada Jack","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Canada_Jack-2010-11-01T23:03:00.000Z-Soviet_mission_names","replies":["c-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-01T23:03:00.000Z"]}}-->

Mlm - I insist you re-instate the Soyuz pages in question - you have failed to gain the required consensus here to do this. Canada Jack (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z","author":"Canada Jack","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-01T23:03:00.000Z","replies":["c-Colds7ream-2010-11-05T23:51:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z","c-Colds7ream-2010-11-05T23:57:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z"]}}-->

Well, that went well; you've managed to scare off GW, one of our best contributors - it was a bit out of line to start making the changes without waiting for an agreement. Colds7ream (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-05T23:51:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-05T23:51:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

You'll likely need to seek him out on NSF; I doubt if he'll continue to watch the page. Colds7ream (talk) 23:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-05T23:57:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-05T23:57:00.000Z-Canada_Jack-2010-11-05T17:45:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Thanks for your words of encouragement. He pointed to three editors by the way, not just me. Mlm42 (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z-Soviet_mission_names","replies":["c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:03:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z","c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:08:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z"]}}-->

Like I said in the thread, I personally agree entirely with your position, but given how hot tensions were running, I'd probably have made changes in userspace rather than article space, collected consensus then moved over. I didn't force my views on anyone. Neither did anyone else, for that matter... Colds7ream (talk) 00:03, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T00:03:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:03:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Although my comment above, on reflection, was probably uncalled for. My apologies. Colds7ream (talk) 00:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T00:08:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:08:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:00:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:10:00.000Z-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:08:00.000Z"]}}-->

No problems.. I was upset to hear he was leaving too. Mlm42 (talk) 00:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T00:10:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:10:00.000Z-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:08:00.000Z","replies":["c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:11:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:10:00.000Z"]}}-->

Yeah - 32,000 edits; he'll be missed. :-( Colds7ream (talk) 00:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T00:11:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:11:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T00:10:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-11-06T06:55:00.000Z-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:11:00.000Z"]}}-->

I think it might be time to make a request for comments, as you suggested. Mlm42 (talk) 06:55, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T06:55:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-11-06T06:55:00.000Z-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T00:11:00.000Z","replies":["c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T08:54:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T06:55:00.000Z"]}}-->

Go for it then - the instructions are at WP:RfC. Colds7ream (talk) 08:54, 6 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-06T08:54:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":6,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-06T08:54:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-11-06T06:55:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human spaceflight.
Message added 02:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

and also see User_talk:Colds7ream#Fallout -MBK₀₀₄ 02:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-07T02:37:00.000Z","author":"MBK004","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MBK004-2010-11-07T02:37:00.000Z-Talkback_2","replies":[],"displayName":"MBK"}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Colds7ream's talk page.
Message added 09:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-07T09:48:00.000Z","author":"Colds7ream","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Colds7ream-2010-11-07T09:48:00.000Z-Talkback_3","replies":[]}}-->

Hello! As an member editor of one or more of the Spaceflight, Human spaceflight, Unmanned spaceflight, Timeline of spaceflight or Space colonisation WikiProjects, I'd like to draw to your attention a proposal I have made with regards to the future of the spaceflight-related portals, which can be found at Portal talk:Spaceflight#Portal merge. I'd very much appreciate any suggestions or feedback you'd be able to offer! Many thanks,

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Human spaceflight at 08:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-09T08:48:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-11-09T08:48:00.000Z-Spaceflight_portals","replies":[]}}-->

Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, I have made some changes to the list of members of WikiProject Human spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, I would be grateful if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the critical mass of editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Human spaceflight at 19:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-17T19:09:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-11-17T19:09:00.000Z-WikiProject_Human_spaceflight_activity","replies":[]}}-->

Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, I have made some changes to the list of members of WikiProject Human spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, I would be grateful if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the critical mass of editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight at 07:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-19T07:06:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-11-19T07:06:00.000Z-WikiProject_Timeline_of_Spaceflight_activity","replies":[]}}-->

Hello WikiProject Space member! A discussion has been started regarding the future of WikiProject Space here; any comments you might have would be welcome! There are mainly two competing ideas:

1. Centralize all the Space-related WikiProjects, such as Astronomy and Spaceflight, and merge them into WikiProject Space, or
2. Separate the Astronomy and Spaceflight "sides" of WikiProject, and remove WikiProject Space.

If you can think of other options, that's great too. Your contribution to the discussion would be much appreciated. Thanks! :)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Space at 00:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-29T00:08:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-11-29T00:08:00.000Z-WikiProject_Space_reorganization","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, this is an automated message to inform you that some errors were encountered while processing your delivery request (WikiProject Space reorganization). Please deliver the messages to the following users manually, if you wish, because the bot was not allowed to do so:

• Cremepuff222 - User is blocked.
• Rdwoodneo - User does not exist.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot at 00:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-29T00:16:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-11-29T00:16:00.000Z-Errors_In_Message_Delivery","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at GW Simulations's talk page.
Message added 22:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-28T22:41:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-11-28T22:41:00.000Z-Talkback_4","replies":["c-GW_Simulations-2010-11-29T22:32:00.000Z-GW_Simulations-2010-11-28T22:41:00.000Z"]}}-->

• And another --GW… 22:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-29T22:32:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-11-29T22:32:00.000Z-GW_Simulations-2010-11-28T22:41:00.000Z","replies":[],"displayName":"G"}}-->

Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the space-related WikiProjects, some changes have been made to the lists of members of WikiProject Moon (here) and Mars (here). If you still consider yourself to be an active editor either of these projects, it would be appreciated if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the number of active editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Solar System at 17:52, 3 December 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-03T17:52:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-12-03T17:52:00.000Z-WikiProjects_Moon_and_Mars_activity","replies":[]}}-->

Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, changes have been made to the list of members of WikiProject Spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, it would be appreciated if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the number of active editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 18:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-03T18:01:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-12-03T18:01:00.000Z-WikiProject_Spaceflight_activity","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at GW Simulations's talk page.
Message added 22:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T22:53:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-12-05T22:53:00.000Z-Talkback_5","replies":[]}}-->

Please see WP:AIRPORTS page content, the year is not needed if the start date is less than 13 months from now. Please discuss your changes there and gain new consensus before changing. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z-Years_for_start_dates_(Lagos_Airport)","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:28:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z","c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:29:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z"]}}-->

Can you point me to the discussion where this convention was established, please? Thanks, Mlm42 (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:28:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:28:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airports/page_content (Line 11). Bring this up to discussion at the project talk page and gain new consensus. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:29:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:29:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:24:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:29:00.000Z"]}}-->

There's no discussion there, you pointed to the guideline page. Was there a discussion on this point? Or any evidence of consensus? Mlm42 (talk) 23:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:29:00.000Z","replies":["c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:38:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z","c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z"]}}-->

There was one here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_10#Service_Start.2FEnd_Dates:_Objection_to_Guideline_10_for_the_Body_section since another editor on Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport wants to include the year in dates as well. But that disnussion died down already and no changes were made. I would start a new discussion on this matter and get consensus. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:38:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:38:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Also, here is another one that was brought up Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_9#Regarding_start.2Fend_dates. Snoozlepet (talk) 00:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:31:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:44:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z"]}}-->

There is certainly no consensus there regarding a 13 months standard.. noone even seemed to support this guideline. In fact you yourself said "I would say to go ahead and put the year regardless of what month it starts." To which I agree! Why then did you revert my edit?! *confusion*.. Mlm42 (talk) 23:44, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:44:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:44:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z","replies":["c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:45:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:44:00.000Z"]}}-->

I was going by the project guidelines and every other airport does not include year for new services. Yes, i agree the year needs to be added for clarification but I cannot change that on what I said. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:45, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:45:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":6,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:45:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:44:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:50:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:45:00.000Z"]}}-->

But you're not forced to follow a project's guidelines, especially if the guidelines don't come from consensus! Mlm42 (talk) 23:50, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:50:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":7,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:50:00.000Z-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:45:00.000Z","replies":["c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:51:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:50:00.000Z"]}}-->

Started a new discussion on this matter at WP:AIRPORTS. Snoozlepet (talk) 23:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-05T23:51:00.000Z","author":"Snoozlepet","type":"comment","level":8,"id":"c-Snoozlepet-2010-12-05T23:51:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-05T23:50:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello there! As you may or may not be aware, a recent discussion on the future of the Space-related WikiProjects has concluded, leading to the abolition of WP:SPACE and leading to a major reorganisation of WP:SPACEFLIGHT. It would be much appreciated if you would like to participate in the various ongoing discussions at the reorganisation page and the WikiProject Spaceflight talk page. If you are a member of one of WP:SPACEFLIGHT's child projects but not WP:SPACEFLIGHT itself, it would also be very useful if you could please add your name to the member list here. Many thanks!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 00:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-12-06T00:13:00.000Z-WikiProject_Spaceflight_reboot","replies":[]}}-->

Could the change in the number of assessed articles have anything to do with the changes made by this editor to the documentation of the Spaceflight banner? I'm not au fait with all the workings of banners so I'm not sure exactly why these changes would be made. ChiZeroOne (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-08T01:25:00.000Z","author":"ChiZeroOne","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:25:00.000Z-Changed_assessments","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:37:00.000Z-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:25:00.000Z"]}}-->

The changes are listed here, and are due to Koavf's edits (like this one), replacing the HSF banner with the new Spaceflight banner.. it looks like it's causing conflicts when the WP:Space banner is also trying to assess the article. Mlm42 (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-08T01:37:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:37:00.000Z-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:25:00.000Z","replies":["c-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:46:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:37:00.000Z"]}}-->

Ah ok, just checking because I also wasn't sure if the changes to the template were what we wanted. ChiZeroOne (talk) 01:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-08T01:46:00.000Z","author":"ChiZeroOne","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:46:00.000Z-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:37:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:51:00.000Z-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:46:00.000Z"]}}-->

I think those changes are okay; I don't think they really change the functionality at the moment, but they might give more flexibility later. Mlm42 (talk) 01:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-08T01:51:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-08T01:51:00.000Z-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-08T01:46:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Talk:Progress M1-5.
Message added 00:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Another --GW… 00:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-10T00:41:00.000Z","author":"GW Simulations","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GW_Simulations-2010-12-10T00:41:00.000Z-Talkback_6","replies":[],"displayName":"G"}}-->

Thanks for your interest in helping the aviation project and in particularly guidelines. I do support any efforts to improve the work of the project but you just have to bear with us if we come across a bit gruff and dinosaur like but we do respond to a reasoned discussion. If you need any help then please ask (on any of the multitude of talk pages!). MilborneOne (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-14T20:17:00.000Z","author":"MilborneOne","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MilborneOne-2010-12-14T20:17:00.000Z-WP:AVIATION","replies":["c-Mlm42-2010-12-14T20:20:00.000Z-MilborneOne-2010-12-14T20:17:00.000Z"]}}-->

Thanks; I probably come across a bit "gruff" sometimes too! :) Mlm42 (talk) 20:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-14T20:20:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2010-12-14T20:20:00.000Z-MilborneOne-2010-12-14T20:17:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

The Downlink
Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight	Issue 0, December 2010
Welcome to The Downlink · Reorganisation of Space WikiProjects · User Activity Checks Welcome to The Downlink Welcome to The Downlink, a new monthly newsletter intended to inform members of WikiProject Spaceflight about the latest developments in the project and its articles. Future issues will contain information on issues under discussion, newly featured content, and articles written by members of the project to appear in the newsletter. All members of WikiProject Spaceflight are invited to contribute any content that they would like to see in the newsletter. If you were not aware of being a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, membership of the former Human spaceflight, Unmanned spaceflight, Timeline of spaceflight and Space colonization WikiProjects was merged into WikiProject spaceflight during the reorganisation of the spaceflight projects, for more details, please see below. Reorganisation of Space WikiProjects The ongoing discussion of the future of Space WikiProjects has been making progress. WikiProject Space was abolished on 5 December 2010, with the Spaceflight, Astronomy and Solar System projects becoming independent of each other. On the same day, an assessment banner, {{WikiProject Spaceflight}} was created for WikiProject Spaceflight to replace the generic space one which had been used previously. On 9 December, WikiProject Space Colonization was abolished, with its tasks being subsumed into WikiProject Spaceflight. On 12 December, the Human spaceflight and Unmanned spaceflight WikiProjects became task forces of WikiProject Spaceflight, whilst WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight became a working group. A number of issues are still under discussion: Introducing better defined assessment criteria and an A-class review process Setting clearer importance criteria for assessing articles Establishing a joint task force with the Astronomy and Solar System projects to cover space telescopes and planetary probes Defining the roles of projects, taskforces and working groups, and processes for establishing new ones Improving the profile and activity of the project Much of the current discussion is taking place on the WikiProject Spaceflight talk page, however there is still some discussion on the original proposal page. User Activity Checks A series of checks are underway to establish the numbers of users who are still active within WikiProject Spaceflight, its task forces and working group. All usernames on the members lists were struck out, and members were asked to unstrike their own names if they were still an active member of the project. If you wish to do so, and have not already, please unstrike your name from the master list, plus the lists on any applicable task forces or working groups Published by WikiProject Spaceflight, if you have any content you wish to include in future newsletters, please contribute

You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 16:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-16T16:19:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2010-12-16T16:19:00.000Z-The_Downlink:_Issue_0","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight.
Message added 18:30, 23 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at ChiZeroOne's talk page.
Message added 13:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-12-26T13:50:00.000Z","author":"ChiZeroOne","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ChiZeroOne-2010-12-26T13:50:00.000Z-Talkback_8","replies":[]}}-->

The Downlink
Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight	Issue 1, January 2011
Welcome to The Downlink · Project News · News from Orbit · Article News · Space Stations and the Push for Featured Topics · Salyut 2 Welcome to The Downlink Welcome to the first full issue of The Downlink, a new monthly newsletter intended to inform members of WikiProject Spaceflight about the latest developments in the project and its articles. Below you will find information about happenings within the project, our recognised content, spaceflight in the news and events needing to be covered in articles. You will also find an editorial about the first concerted effort to develop featured topics related to spaceflight, and an article in need of your help and improvements. Project News will provide details of discussions about and changes in the organisation and structure of the project, newly recognised content, and changes in membership. News from Orbit will summarise spaceflight news and upcoming events, and list suggestions for articles in need of updating as a result. Article News will give details of requests for assistance within articles, and discussions regarding content. All members of WikiProject Spaceflight are invited to contribute any content that they would like to see in the newsletter, and we would particularly welcome the submission of editorials, or an article about an area of spaceflight which you are working on, or particularly interested in. Please see The Downlink page for more details. Project News A new working group has been formed. The space stations working group is expected to work towards creating Featured topics related to space stations. It currently has three members. Discussion within the project is still dominated by the reorganisation proposals. A discussion over the formation and roles of working groups and task forces has led to some clarification regarding working groups, however the roles of the task forces remain vague, and several proposals to abolish them have surfaced. The Human Spaceflight to-do list has been merged into the main project to-do list, with the combined list currently located on the Tasks page of the Spaceflight portal. A discussion regarding opening relations with the Aerospace biography task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation was held, but no conclusions were reached. The Article Alerts bot has resumed operation, and a problem with the information the bot had been delivering was discussed and resolved. New assessment criteria for importance and quality have been implemented, and refinements continue to be made to the importance scale. The scope of the project was redefined to exclude astronomical objects explicitly. Although A-class criteria have been defined, a review process is yet to be discussed or implemented. Colds7ream conducted an analysis of open tasks related to the reorganisation which four major issues remain unresolved: Discussion concerning the existence and roles of task forces within the project; recruitment of new editors; updating guidelines and whether the project or the task forces should be responsible for maintaining them; and the continued existence of the Human spaceflight portal six weeks after consensus was reached to abolish it. Discussion about the structure of the project is ongoing, with several proposals currently on the table. One proposal calls for the abolition of task forces in favour of increased emphasis on working groups, whilst another calls for the task forces to become a list of topics. The idea of a formal collaboration system has been suggested, however opposition has been raised. One of the main open tasks at the moment is replacing the older {{WikiProject Space}} and {{WikiProject Human spaceflight}} banners with the new {{WikiProject Spaceflight}} banner. Articles which need to be retagged are currently listed in Category:WikiProject Spaceflight articles using deprecated project tags. ChiZeroOne is doing a very good job replacing them, but as of the morning of 31 December, there are still 1,424 left to be converted. Additionally, the implementation of a new B-class checklist built into the template has necessitated the reassessment of former B-class articles, which the template has automatically classified as C-class. News from Orbit On 3 December, USA-212, the first X-37B, landed at Vandenberg Air Force Base after a successful mission. On 5 December Proton-M with a Blok DM-03 upper stage failed to place three Glonass-M satellites into orbit, the first of three failures in less than forty eight hours. The NanoSail-D2 spacecraft was supposed to have been ejected from FASTSAT in the early hours of the next morning, however it does not appear to have separated. Finally the Akatsuki spacecraft failed to enter orbit around Venus in the evening of 6 December. The Proton launch was the maiden flight of the Blok DM-03, which does not currently have an article. On 8 December the Dragon C1 demonstration mission was conducted, with the SpaceX Dragon making a little under two orbits of the Earth on its maiden flight, before landing in the Pacific Ocean to complete a successful mission. The Falcon 9 rocket which launched the Dragon spacecraft also deployed eight CubeSats: SMDC-ONE 1, QbX-1, QbX-2, Perseus 000, Perseus 001, Perseus 002, Perseus 003 and Mayflower. The CubeSats do not currently have articles. On 15 December, a Soyuz-FG launched Soyuz TMA-20 to the International Space Station, carrying three members of the Expedition 26 crew. It docked two days later. The Soyuz TMA-20 article is currently short, and could use improvements to bring it up to the same level as articles for US manned spaceflights. On 17 December, a Long March 3A launched Compass-IGSO2. There is currently no article for this satellite. 17 December saw Intelsat regain control of the Galaxy 15 satellite, which had been out of control since a malfunction in April. The Galaxy 15 article is in need of serious cleanup and a good copyedit. On 25 December a GSLV Mk.I failed to place GSAT-5P into orbit. A Proton-M with a Briz-M upper stage successfully launched KA-SAT on 26 December. Barring any suborbital launches at the end of the month which have not yet been announced (a NASA Black Brant was scheduled for December but does not appear to have flown), 2010 in spaceflight concluded on 29 December when an Ariane 5ECA launched the Hispasat-1E and Koreasat 6 spacecraft. These do not currently have articles. Four launches are currently scheduled to occur in January 2011. A Delta IV Heavy is expected to launch NRO L-49 on 17 January. The satellite is expected to be an Improved Crystal electro-optical imaging spacecraft. Two launches are planned for 20 January, with Kounotori 2, the second H-II Transfer Vehicle, being launched by an H-IIB, and the Zenit-3F making its maiden flight to deploy Elektro-L No.1, the first Russian geostationary weather satellite to be launched since 1994. On 28 January Progress M-09M will be launched by a Soyuz-U. 28 January will also be the twenty-fifth anniversary of the loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger on mission STS-51-L. Article News It was requested that the article Walter Haeussermann be expanded. Haeussermann, a member of the von Braun rocket group, died on 8 December. Although the article has been updated following his death, a user requested that more information about the engineer be added. Another user requested that the articles Commercial Space Launch Act and Launch Services Purchase Act be created, to cover laws of the United States concerning spaceflight. Articles related to methods of taking-off and landing were discussed. The term VTVL currently has an article whilst VTHL and HTHL do not. It was suggested that the existing article should be merged, and each term be covered by the article for the equivalent aviation term, however some distinction between use in the fields of aviation and spaceflight should remain. Concern was raised that a large scale deletion request could cause many images to be lost from articles, help was requested to investigate whether any of the images were not subject to copyright, or if they were then whether they could be uploaded to the English Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. Concerns were raised about a large amount of content in the newly-created article deorbit of Mir duplicating existing content in existing Good Article Progress M1-5. A proposal to merge deorbit of Mir into Progress M1-5 was made, however objections were raised, and discussion has since stalled without reaching a consensus. It has also been requested that the article Mir be copyedited. The existence of separate categories for "spaceflight" and "space exploration" has been questioned, with a suggestion that some of the exploration categories, including Category:Space exploration iteslf, should be merged into their spaceflight counterparts. Missile Range Instrumentation Ship is currently listed at requested moves, with a proposal to rename it tracking ship. The only open good article nomination is of the book Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet, which is currently awaiting review. Editorial – Space Stations and the Push for Featured Topics There has recently been much talk about trying to increase the activity of the project. To this end, a major reorganisation effort has been undertaken, which has seen the space WikiProjects separated into the Astronomy, Solar System and Spaceflight groups, with WikiProject Space being abolished. We have also seen the child projects of WikiProject Spaceflight being abolished, with Timeline of Spaceflight becoming a working group, and the Unmanned and Human Spaceflight projects becoming task forces for now, with some suggestions that they should be abolished outright. The problem with the previous structure was that there were too many different groups of editors, and nobody was sure which projects were supposed to be doing what. Now there is only one project, this is somewhat clearer, but spaceflight is still a huge topic. Another way to improve the activity of the project is to attract more editors. Spaceflight is a topic which many people have at least a very casual interest in, and therefore it is strange that there are only about four or five people regularly participating in discussions on the project talk page. Evidently action is needed to raise the profile of the project. One way in which the project's profile can be raised is to have a major success associated with it. The creation of a featured topic could be one such success, and would also be hugely beneficial to articles in the area that it relates to. Space Stations are one of the most high-profile and notable areas of spaceflight, and are therefore a logical choice to spearhead such an initiative. To this end, in late December a working group was established to concentrate and coordinate efforts to establish featured topics related to space stations. An initial proposal calls for topics on Skylab, Salyut, Mir and the International Space Station, as well as one on space stations in general. There is currently an effort to get Mir promoted to Good Article status; the article currently requires a copyedit, after which it will be sent for peer review and then to GAN. This is by no means a short-term project. There are many articles, particularly for the larger space stations such as the ISS and Mir, which are currently nowhere near becoming recognised content. Skylab is the smallest of the proposed featured topics, but it still requires that three C-class articles, two Start-class articles and a redirect all reach at least Good Article status, with at least three becoming Featured Articles. The ISS topic is so large that it may have to be subdivided. I don't expect that we will have any featured topics by the end of the year, but I believe that a Good Topic, which requires all articles reach at least GA status, but does not require any featured articles, may be possible. I also believe that several articles on the subject can easily be improved to Good Article status, and some articles may be at featured level by the end of the year. In the long term, having featured topics will benefit the project and its content. Selected Article – Salyut 2 Salyut 2 was an early space station, launched in 1973 as part of the Salyut and Almaz programmes. It malfunctioned two days after launch, and consequently was never visited by a manned Soyuz mission. The Salyut 2 article describes the station: “ Salyut 2 (OPS-1)(Russian: Салют-2; English: Salute 2) was launched April 4, 1973. It was not really a part of the same program as the other Salyut space stations, instead being the highly classified prototype military space station Almaz. It was given the designation Salyut 2 to conceal its true nature. Despite its successful launch, within two days the as-yet-unmanned Salyut 2 began losing pressure and its flight control failed; the cause of the failure was likely due to shrapnel piercing the station when the discarded Proton rocket upper stage that had placed it in orbit later exploded nearby. On April 11, 1973, 11 days after launch, an unexplainable accident caused the two large solar panels to be torn loose from the space station cutting off all power to the space station. Salyut 2 re-entered on May 28, 1973. ” The article is currently assessed as start class, and is in need of attention. It consists of the above paragraph, along with a list of specifications and an infobox. The article needs to be rewritten in a more encyclopaedic style, and with more information about the space station. It has not yet been determined whether Salyut 2 would have to be included in a featured topic about the Salyut programme, or whether since it was never manned it is less integral to the topic, however if its inclusion were necessary then in its current form it would be a major impediment to this. Downlink readers are encouraged to improve this article, with a view to getting it to B-class and possibly a viable Good Article candidate by the end of the month. Published by WikiProject Spaceflight, if you have any content you wish to include in future newsletters, please contribute

You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 14:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-01T14:46:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2011-01-01T14:46:00.000Z-The_Downlink:_Issue_1","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight/Space stations working group.
Message added 23:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just so you know, {{deadlink}} should go inside the ref tags, not after. In any event, thanks for tagging the presidential line of succession article; I've replaced the link. -Rrius (talk) 22:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-09T22:03:00.000Z","author":"Rrius","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Rrius-2011-01-09T22:03:00.000Z-Deadlink","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-01-09T23:47:00.000Z-Rrius-2011-01-09T22:03:00.000Z"]}}-->

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for letting me know. Mlm42 (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-09T23:47:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-01-09T23:47:00.000Z-Rrius-2011-01-09T22:03:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hi again Mlm42. You previously commented in a discussion on this topic on WikiProject Spacecraft. A (new?) anon user has begun to improve the VTVL article. I hope you will take a look, assist if interested, and perhaps weigh in on the Talk page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 17:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-13T17:09:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-N2e-2011-01-13T17:09:00.000Z-VTVL,_VTHL,_etc._terms_for_Spacecraft_and_Rockets?","replies":[]}}-->

Hello. I tried adding a fourth column but it won't let me do it,how do you actually do it?

--MKY661 (talk) 01:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-15T01:12:00.000Z","author":"MKY661","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MKY661-2011-01-15T01:12:00.000Z-Your_Reply","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-01-15T02:31:00.000Z-MKY661-2011-01-15T01:12:00.000Z"]}}-->

I see; I've replied here. Mlm42 (talk) 02:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-15T02:31:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-01-15T02:31:00.000Z-MKY661-2011-01-15T01:12:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Spaceflight for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview here. If you feel uncomfortable answering any questions, feel free to skip it. If you have any questions, you can drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks. – SMasters (talk) 05:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-15T05:21:00.000Z","author":"SMasters","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-SMasters-2011-01-15T05:21:00.000Z-Interview_request","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, could you please give your feedback on this issue. Thanks, —Why so serious? ^{Talk to me} 04:30, 17 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-17T04:30:00.000Z","author":"Abhishek191288","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Abhishek191288-2011-01-17T04:30:00.000Z-Opinion","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-01-17T04:40:00.000Z-Abhishek191288-2011-01-17T04:30:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Why so serious?"}}-->

I've now left a comment on the talk page. Mlm42 (talk) 04:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-17T04:40:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-01-17T04:40:00.000Z-Abhishek191288-2011-01-17T04:30:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight.
Message added 23:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You previously commented on the idea of new spacecraft templates. The discussion has reached a point where more review of the current (sandbox) draft Spacecraft missions and Spacecraft class templates would be helpful. Info and links are on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight page in the Infobox spaceflight section. Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC) N2e (talk) 23:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-17T23:56:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-N2e-2011-01-17T23:56:00.000Z-Talkback_10","replies":[]}}-->

Because of the very specialized and complex technical concepts defined by terms like spaceworthiness, airworthiness, seaworthiness and crashworthiness, I have the opinion that each of them deserve to have their own entry in Wikipedia, as is now. So, my proposal is against the mere merge of the "spaceworthiness" entry with the "spacecraft" one, but just to include some reference to "spaceworthiness" in the entry for "spacecraft". Sethemanuel (talk) 14:08, 28 January 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-01-28T14:08:00.000Z","author":"Sethemanuel","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sethemanuel-2011-01-28T14:08:00.000Z-Spaceworthiness_(see_also_Airworthiness,_Seaworthiness,_Crashworthiness_...)","replies":[]}}-->

The Downlink
Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight	Issue 2, February 2011
Project News · News from Orbit · Article News · The Charts · Yuri Gagarin Project News A report on popular pages from December 2010 revealed surprising trends in readers' interests. Boeing X-37 was the most popular article within the project's scope, with SpaceX Dragon in second with Global Positioning System in third place. The top seven articles were all assessed as C-class, with the remainder of the top ten being Good Articles. It was noted with some concern that moon landing conspiracy theories was more popular than moon landing. A discussion regarding whether missiles warranted inclusion within the project scope was conducted, and resulted in the continued inclusion of missiles. The last remaining articles tagged with the banner of the former Human Spaceflight WikiProject were re-tagged with the WikiProject Spaceflight banner. The last banner was removed on 8 January, and the template has since been deleted. The project is thankful to ChiZeroOne for his work in this field. Concerns were raised that the new article reporting system was not working correctly, however it was noted that there is sometimes a delay before articles appear on the list. Discussion regarding the existence of the separate spaceflight and space exploration category structures led to a mass CfD being filed on 10 January to abolish the space exploration categories, merging them into their counterparts in the spaceflight category structure. This was successful, and the exploration categories have been removed. Several other categorisation issues remain unresolved. A proposal was made to standardise some of the infoboxes used by the project, the future of Template:Infobox spacecraft (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was discussed, and design work began on a replacement. Template:Rocket specifications-all (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was nominated for deletion and subsequently kept due to extant substitutions, however it was noted that the template had been deprecated by WikiProject Rocketry. Concerns were also raised that the existing infoboxes were not well-equipped to handle spacecraft which operated in more than one orbit, or whose orbits changed over the course of their missions (which in practise is most of them). Five members of the project gave interviews for the Wikipedia Signpost, and a report on the project, authored by SMasters (talk · contribs), is expected to be published in the 7 February edition of the Signpost. It is hoped that this will raise interest in and awareness of the project. News from orbit Four orbital launches were conducted in January, beginning on 20 January with the launch of Elektro-L No.1 on the first Zenit-3F rocket. This was followed later the same day by the launch of a Delta IV Heavy with the USA-224 reconnaissance satellite. The articles for USA-224 and the Zenit-3F rocket could use some expansion, whilst the Elektro-L No.1 satellite needs its own article. On 22 January, an H-IIB launched the second H-II Transfer Vehicle, Kounotori 2, to resupply the International Space Station. It arrived at the station on 27 January. Less than a day after its arrival, another cargo mission was launched to the station; Progress M-09M departed Baikonur early in the morning of 28 January, docking on 30 January. In addition to payloads to resupply the station, the Progress spacecraft is carrying a small subsatellite, Kedr, which will be deployed in February. Kedr does not currently have an article. Progress M-08M departed on 24 January to make the Pirs module available for Progress M-09M, and has since reentered the atmosphere. Its article needs to be updated to reflect the successful completion of its mission. The NanoSail-D2 satellite, which failed to deploy from FASTSAT in December, unexpectedly separated from its parent craft and began operations on 18 January, with its solar sail deploying on 21 January. Nine orbital launches are scheduled to occur in February, beginning with the launch of the first Geo-IK-2 satellite; Geo-IK-2 No.11, atop a Rokot/Briz-KM, on the first day of the month. Articles need to be written for the Geo-IK-2 series of satellites, as well as for Geo-IK-2 No.11 itself, and the Briz-KM upper stage that will be used to insert it into orbit. A Minotaur I rocket will launch NRO L-66, a classified payload for the US National Reconnaissance Office, on 5 February. The payload has not yet been identified, however once more details are known, it will need an article. Iran is expected to launch the Rasad 1 and Fajr 1 satellites in February, with 14 February the reported launch date. The satellites will fly aboard a single rocket; either the first Simorgh or the third Safir. Once this launch occurs, the satellites will need articles, and the article on their carrier rocket will require updating. The second Automated Transfer Vehicle, Johannes Kepler, is scheduled to launch on 15 February to resupply the ISS. Docking is expected to occur on 23 February. 23 February will also see the much-delayed launch of Glory atop a Taurus-XL 3110 rocket. This will be the first Taurus launch since the launch failure in early 2009 which resulted in the loss of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory. In addition to Glory, three CubeSats will be deployed; KySat-1, Hermes and Explorer-1 [PRIME]. KySat and Hermes require articles, whilst the article on Explorer-1 [PRIME] needs to be updated. On 24 February, a Soyuz-2.1b/Fregat rocket will launch the first Glonass-K1 satellite; Glonass-K1 No.11. Articles are needed for the series of spacecraft, as well as for the specific satellite being launched. It is likely that a Kosmos designation will be given to the payload when it reaches orbit. In the evening of 24 February, Space Shuttle Discovery will begin its final mission, STS-133, carrying the Permanent Multipurpose Module, a conversion of the Leonardo MPLM, to the ISS. Other payloads include an ExPRESS Logistics Carrier, and the Robonaut2 experimental robot. The first manned mission of 2011, Discovery's six-man crew will transfer equipment to the station, and two EVAs will be performed. The launch has already been scrubbed five times, before Discovery was rolled back to the Vehicle Assembly Building to inspect and repair cracks on its External Tank. At some point in February, a Long March 3B rocket is expected to launch two navigation satellites; Compass-M2 and Compass-M3, as part of the Compass navigation system. The date of this launch is currently unknown. Both satellites will require articles once more information is available. A PSLV launch, carrying the Resourcesat-2, X-Sat and YouthSat spacecraft, is expected to launch from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre towards the end of the month, probably between 20 and 23 February. Stop press: The Rokot launch was conducted at 14:00 UTC on 1 February, and at the time of writing it appears to have ended in failure, due to a suspected upper stage malfunction. The spacecraft is in orbit, it is not clear at the time of writing whether it will be salvageable. Article news Reaction Engines Skylon is currently undergoing peer review, its discussion page can be found at Wikipedia:Peer review/Reaction Engines Skylon/archive1. A user requested feedback on major changes which had been made to the article, however at the time of writing no responses have been offered. Following up on the issues covered in the last issue, the requested move of Missile Range Instrumentation Ship to Tracking ship was successful, with the article being renamed. The discussion concerning types of launch and landing resulted in a proposal to merge VTVL into VTOL, however this has been met with some opposition. Several other options have been suggested on Talk:VTVL. The large scale deletion of mis-tagged Soviet images on Commons went ahead, with most of the useful ones having already been backed-up locally under fair use criteria. Discussion was held regarding the naming of spaceflight-related articles. Concerns were raised regarding inconsistency in article titles and disambiguators. A project guideline was adopted to standardise titles, with the parenthesised disambiguators "(satellite)" and "(spacecraft)" being adopted as standards for spacecraft, and the exclusion of manufacturers' names from article titles was recommended. Issues regarding Japanese spacecraft with two names, the correct names for early Apollo missions, and dealing with acronyms and abbreviated names remain unresolved. A large number of articles were moved to conform to the standard disambiguation pattern. In addition, several Requested Moves were debated. A proposal to move SpaceX Dragon to Dragon (spacecraft), which began prior to the adoption of the standardised disambiguators, was successful. Atmospheric reentry was subject to two requested moves, firstly one which would have seen it renamed spacecraft atmospheric reentry, which was unsuccessful, however a second proposal shortly afterwards saw it moved to atmospheric entry. A proposal currently under discussion could see Lunar rover (Apollo) renamed Lunar Roving Vehicle Questions surrounding the transliteration of Russian names resurfaced, with a proposal to rename Vladimir Chelomey to Vladimir Chelomei being closed with no consensus, and a proposal to rename Yury Usachov to Yuri Usachev ongoing. Several long-standing merger proposals were closed. A proposal to merge Venera 15 and Venera 16 into Venera 15 and 16 was closed as no consensus, with the combined page being moved to Venera 4V-2 to reduce the overlap in the articles' scopes. Returnable satellite was merged into Fanhui Shi Weixing. Experimental Assembly of Structures in EVA and Assembly Concept for Construction of Erectable Space Structures was nominated for Good Article reassessment due to concerns over the article's quality. Doubts were also expressed over the thoroughness of the original review conducted upon its nomination for GA status. It was also suggested that the article's title may not be the most common name for the experiment, and that it might be necessary to move the page. Concerns were also raised regarding whether Space Interferometry Mission was up-to-date, however these are being addressed. Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet looks likely to be promoted to GA status. Help was requested for adding citations to List of Mir spacewalks. A request was made that STS-88 be reviewed against the B class criteria, and suggestions for improvements made. Another user requested improvements to the article Yuri Gagarin, with a view to having the article promoted to featured status in time for the fiftieth anniversary of his Vostok 1 mission. As a result of this request, Yuri Gagarin is this month's selected article. Questions were raised as to whether an article or category should be created to cover derelict satellites. The categorisation of spacecraft by the type of rocket used to place them into orbit was also suggested. In another categorisation issue, it was questioned whether Space law should fall under space or spaceflight. Stop press: Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet has now been promoted to GA status. The Charts There is no editorial this month as no content was submitted for one. Instead, we present the "top ten" most popular articles within the project, based on the number of page views in January. Space Shuttle Challenger disaster was the most popular article of the last month, up fourteen places from 15th in December. Space Shuttle Challenger was the highest climber in the top 40, up 42 places from 50th. December's most popular article. Boeing X-37, dropped 57 places to 58th. On a happier note further down the chart, moon landing is now ahead of moon landing conspiracy theories. № Article Movement 1 Space Shuttle Challenger disaster ↑14 (15) 2 Richard Branson ↑5 (7) 3 Neil Armstrong ↑2 (5) 4 Space Shuttle Columbia disaster ↑16 (20) 5 Global Positioning System ↓2 (3) 6 Apollo 11 ↑2 (8) 7 Satellite ↑4 (11) 8 Space Shuttle Challenger ↑42 (50) 9 Apollo 13 ↓3 (6) 10 NASA ↓1 (9) For the full list of the top 1,500 popular pages within the project, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Popular pages (or the archived record for January). Selected Article: Yuri Gagarin Yuri Gagarin was the first man to fly in space, aboard Vostok 1 in April 1961. He was subsequently awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union, and was training for a second flight at the time of his death in 1968. His article describes him and his spaceflight experience: “ Yuri Alekseyevich Gagarin (Russian: Ю́рий Алексе́евич Гага́рин, Russian pronunciation: [ˈjurʲɪj ɐlʲɪˈksʲeɪvʲɪtɕ ɡɐˈɡarʲɪn]; 9 March 1934 – 27 March 1968), Hero of the Soviet Union, was a Soviet cosmonaut who on 12 April 1961 became the first human to journey into outer space. On 12 April 1961, Gagarin became the first man to travel into space, launching to orbit aboard the Vostok 3KA-3 (Vostok 1). His call sign in this flight was Kedr (Cedar; Russian: Кедр). During his flight, Gagarin famously whistled the tune "The Motherland Hears, The Motherland Knows" (Russian: "Родина слышит, Родина знает"). The first two lines of the song are: "The Motherland hears, the Motherland knows/Where her son flies in the sky". This patriotic song was written by Dmitri Shostakovich in 1951 (opus 86), with words by Yevgeniy Dolmatovsky. ” The article is currently assessed as C class, and had been assessed as B class prior to the criteria being redefined. Although a full reassessment has not yet been made, it seems close to the B class criteria, however details on his spaceflight experiences are somewhat lacking. It has been requested that the article be developed to Featured status by April, in time for the fiftieth anniversary of his mission. Published by WikiProject Spaceflight, if you have any content you wish to include in future newsletters, please contribute

You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 00:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-02T00:20:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2011-02-02T00:20:00.000Z-The_Downlink:_Issue_2","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at ChiZeroOne's talk page.
Message added 16:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-04T16:02:00.000Z","author":"ChiZeroOne","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ChiZeroOne-2011-02-04T16:02:00.000Z-Talkback_11","replies":[]}}-->

Hi. ChiZero and I have been discussing something and he suggested I ask you for an opinion. Rather than copy the discussion somewhere else, it is probably best just to point you to that discussion on ChiZero's Talk page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC) N2e (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-04T16:02:00.000Z","author":"N2e","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-N2e-2011-02-04T16:02:00.000Z-Talkback_11","replies":[]}}-->

Nice add to Kelly's page. Thx.--Utahredrock (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-06T21:12:00.000Z","author":"Utahredrock","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Utahredrock-2011-02-06T21:12:00.000Z-Cool_poster_w\/Mark_Kelly!","replies":[]}}-->

Kelly is the commander right now of STS-134, which is a planned mission.

He is not the scheduled commander.

Will look at this more later.

Cheers,

Jim

See if the way I just revised it works for you both. I agree, Jim, that he is commander which is why I had it worded that way, but perhaps it is less prone to confusion now. Tvoz/talk 05:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-07T05:58:00.000Z","author":"Tvoz","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Tvoz-2011-02-07T05:58:00.000Z-Kelly","replies":[]}}-->

Template:Infobox taxi spacecraft has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 08:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-10T08:34:00.000Z","author":"This, that and the other","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-This,_that_and_the_other-2011-02-10T08:34:00.000Z-Nomination_for_deletion_of_Template:Infobox_taxi_spacecraft","replies":[],"displayName":"This, that"}}-->

I've attempted to address all of the comments after your B-class assessment. I am hoping you can review, and maybe have a colleague you've worked with review as well. I'd like to nominate for GA, but want more input first. Thanks for your help.--Utahredrock (talk) 17:41, 10 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-10T17:41:00.000Z","author":"Utahredrock","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Utahredrock-2011-02-10T17:41:00.000Z-Mark_Kelly_assessed","replies":[]}}-->

May I suggest that this discussion take place at the bottom of the talk page? Not everybody sees new discussions further up. Noel S McFerran (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-17T00:36:00.000Z","author":"Mcferran","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mcferran-2011-02-17T00:36:00.000Z-Removing_numbers","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:37:00.000Z-Mcferran-2011-02-17T00:36:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Noel S McFerran"}}-->

Fine by me. Mlm42 (talk) 00:37, 17 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-17T00:37:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:37:00.000Z-Mcferran-2011-02-17T00:36:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:39:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:37:00.000Z"]}}-->

The reason I put it there was so it's in the same section as the requests for comment. Mlm42 (talk) 00:39, 17 February 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-02-17T00:39:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:39:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-02-17T00:37:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

The Downlink
Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight	Issue 3, March 2011
Project News News from Orbit Article News Direction of the Project The Charts Europa Project News There have been very few discussions relating to the administration of the project in the last month, as things start to settle down after the merger. An invitation template has been created in an effort to attract new users to the project. Discussion was also held regarding the creation of a list of common templates, however no conclusions were reached. A proposal was made to implement an A-class assessment process, however editors are undecided about whether it would be best to copy the system used by another project such as WP:MILHIST, or to develop one specifically for the requirements of this project. User:ChiZeroOne has set up a collaboration page in his userspace, initially focussing on articles related to Skylab. Collaboration pages were at one point proposed as part of the structure of the Spaceflight project itself, however no consensus was achieved on the issue. If this collaboration is successful, it could open the door to a reevaluation of that situation. News from orbit Five orbital launches were conducted in February, out of nine planned. The first, that of the Geo-IK-2 No.11 satellite atop a Rokot/Briz-KM ended in failure after the upper stage malfunctioned. The Rokot has since been grounded pending a full investigation; the satellite is in orbit, but has been determined to be unusable for its intended mission. A replacement is expected to launch within the year. A general article on Geo-IK-2 satellites is needed, to supplement those on the individual satellites. A Minotaur I rocket launched USA-225, or NROL-66, on 6 February following a one-day delay. The second Automated Transfer Vehicle, Johannes Kepler, was successfully launched on 16 February to resupply the ISS. Docking occurred successfully on 24 February, several hours before Space Shuttle Discovery launched on its final flight, STS-133. Discovery docked with the ISS on 26 February, delivering the Leonardo module and an ExPRESS Logistics Carrier to the station. Following several delays, a Soyuz-2.1b/Fregat rocket launched the first Glonass-K1 satellite; Glonass-K1 No.11, on 26 February. It is currently unclear as to whether the satellite has received a Kosmos designation or not. Seven launches are expected to occur in March. On 4 March, the Glory satellite will launch atop a Taurus-XL 3110 rocket. Three CubeSats will be also be deployed by the Taurus; KySat-1, Hermes and Explorer-1 [Prime]. KySat and Hermes require articles, whilst the article on Explorer-1 [PRIME] needs to be updated. This launch was originally scheduled for February, but following a scrubbed launch attempt, it was delayed. 4 March will also see the launch of the first flight of the second X-37B, atop an Atlas V 501. An article is needed for that flight, which will probably receive a USA designation once it reaches orbit. On 8 March, Discovery is expected to land, bringing to an end the STS-133 mission, and retiring from service 27 years after its maiden flight. On 11 March, a Delta IV Medium+(4,2) will launch the NROL-27 payload. Whilst the identity of this payload is classified, it is widely believed to be a Satellite Data System communications satellite, bound for either a molniya or geostationary orbit. An article for this payload is required. 16 March will see the return to Earth of Soyuz TMA-01M, carrying three members of the ISS Expedition 26 crew. A Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle is expected to deploy the Resourcesat-2, X-Sat and YouthSat spacecraft during a launch in March. The flight has been delayed several times, and was expected to have launched last month, however it is currently scheduled to occur no earlier than 20 March. On 29 March, an Ariane 5ECA will launch the Yahsat 1A and New Dawn communications satellites. Both currently require articles. On 30 March, a Soyuz-FG will launch the manned Soyuz TMA-21 mission to the International Space Station carrying three Expedition 27 crewmembers. On 31 March, a Proton-M/Briz-M launch will carry the SES-3 and Kazsat-2 spacecraft into orbit, in the first dual-launch of commercial communications satellites on a Proton. Several other launches may occur in March, however their status is unclear. Last month, a Long March 3B rocket was expected to launch two navigation satellites; Compass-M2 and Compass-M3, however this launch did not take place. It is unclear if it has been delayed to March, or further. The launch of the Tianlian 2 communications satellite on a Long March 3C may also be conducted in March, or possibly April. Both the Compass and Tianlian launches would occur from the same launch pad, which requires a turnaround of almost a month between launches, so it is unlikely that both will happen in March. A Safir launch, which had been expected in February, now appears to have been delayed to April, but given the secrecy of the Iranian space programme, this is unclear. Article news Discussion regarding the merger of articles on launch and landing modes seems to have stagnated, with no consensus being reached on any existing proposal. A discussion regarding changes in the sizes of Soviet and American rockets during the 1950s and early 1960s was conducted, with claims that rockets became smaller in that period being dismissed, however it was noted that smaller rockets were developed with equivalent capacity to older ones were developed, as well as much larger ones with increased capacities. Category:Derelict satellites orbiting Earth was created as a result of discussion surrounding the categorisation of derelict satellites. Concerns have also been raised that satellites are being listed as no longer being in orbit whilst still in orbit and derelict, and a discussion was held on how their status could be verified. An effort to categorise spacecraft by the type of rocket used to launch them is underway, however the categorisation of satellites by country of launch was rejected. It was reported that a sidebar has been created for articles related to the core concepts of spaceflight. Editors noted that it should only be used for core concepts, and not where it would conflict with an infobox. An anonymous user requested the creation of an article on moon trees. It was pointed out that the subject already had an article, and a redirect was created at the title proposed by the anonymous user. Concerns were raised regarding the quality of the article Japan's space development. Editors noted that the article appeared to be a poorly-translated copy of an article from the Japanese Wikipedia, although there have been some signs of improvement. Discussion regarding moving the article to Japanese space program is ongoing, however a move request has not yet been filed. A particular concern was raised regarding false claims in the article Van Allen radiation belt. In one case a scientist to whom one of the claims had been attributed was contacted, and clarified that he had made a remark to that effect as a joke in the 1960s, but was not entirely sure how or why it had been included in the article. Other concerns were raised before the discussion moved to WikiProject Astronomy. A question was raised regarding the copyright status of images credited to both NASA and ESA, particularly with regard to images of the launch of the Johannes Kepler ATV. The discussion reached no general conclusions, however it was found that the specific images that were suggested for inclusion in the article could be used, since they were explicitly declared to be in the public domain. A template, Template:Spaceflight landmarks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), was created to cover landmarks in the United States that are related to spaceflight. Several sources of public-domain NASA images were also discussed, and it was noted that almost all NASA images are public domain, however there are some exceptions. It has been proposed that Leonardo MPLM be merged with Permanent Multipurpose Module since the two cover separate uses of the same spacecraft. A review of the article STS-88 has also been requested. Three new Good Articles have been listed: Mission: Earth, Voyage to the Home Planet, Bold Orion and SA-500D. Orion (spacecraft) was delisted after concerns that it contained out-of-date content. SA-500D is currently undergoing good article reassessment, using the community reassessment method, after the review of its good article nomination was criticised for being lenient and not sufficiently thorough. Mir, Mark E. Kelly and Reaction Engines Skylon have been nominated for Good Article status and are awaiting review, whilst List of Mir spacewalks is undergoing a peer review with a view to it becoming a featured list. Editorial: Direction of the Project Well folks, its now been more than three months since the discussion that reformed the space-related WikiProjects, and in that time we've had a number of achievements we can be rightly proud of; we've gathered members up to a total of 43, improved awareness of the project via an interview in the Signpost, and refreshed the spaceflight portal into an attractive, up-to-date and useful page. Meanwhile, User:ChiZeroOne has made a sterling effort in clearing up talk page templates belonging to prior projects, we've managed to sort out various policies, started work on rearranging our templates, and User:GW Simulations has begun this excellent monthly newsletter for us. However, there are a few areas of the project that seem to be passing by the wayside, specifically the areas dedicated to fostering collaboration on articles and article sets between the project members, so here I present a call for more collaboration on the project. Presumably, the lack of collaboration is due to folks not being aware of what's going on, so here's a quick rundown of some of the ways you get involved in the group effort. Firstly, and most importantly, it'd be fantastic if more members got involved in the discussions ongoing at the project's main talk page, found at WT:SPACEFLIGHT. There are several discussions ongoing there, such as the relaunch of the spacecraft template, requests for assistance with various assessment and copyright queries, and conversations regarding category organisations, which affect many more articles, and thus editors, than are currently represented in the signatures so far. Secondly, it was established earlier on in the project's formation that a great way to attract more editors would be to develop some good or featured topics. There are a couple of efforts ongoing to try to see this idea to fruition, such as the Space stations working group and ChiZeroOne's own collaboration page, currently focussed on Skylab-related articles. These pages, however, have been notably lacking in activity lately, which is a shame, as their aims, given enough editor input, would really see the project furthering itself. Similarly, there are a number of requests for assessment for articles to be promoted to GA class, among other things, on the Open tasks page, which lists all of the activities needing input from members. If everyone could add this page to their watchlists and swing by it regularly, we could power through the good topics in extremely short order! Other things that could do with being added to people's watchlists include Portal:Spaceflight/Next launch‎, the many templates at Template:Launching/Wrappers and the task list at Portal:Spaceflight/Tasks. Finally, I'd like to try and get people involved in finally settling the organisational problem we have with reference to the task forces and working groups. Whilst the Timeline of spaceflight working group is a continuation of the old Timeline of spaceflight WikiProject and thus is ticking over nicely and the space stations working group has been mentioned previously in this editorial, the task forces (Human spaceflight and Unmanned spaceflight) in particular are currently dead in the water. I'm unsure as to whether or not this is because people are unaware of their existence, they clash too much with one another and the rest of the project or because people don't see a need for them, but if interested parties could make themselves known and others voice suggestions for getting rid of them, we can decide either if they're worth keeping and get them running again, or do away with a layer of bureaucracy and close them down. Any thoughts on the matter would be much appreciated. In summary, then, we've got a great project going here, with a nice set of articles, a good editor base and lots of ways of getting involved. Thus, a plea goes out to everyone to get involved, get editing with the other project members, and hopefully we'll see ourselves take off in a manner not dissimilar to the trajectory dear old Discovery took last week. Many thanks for everyone's hard work so far, and poyekhali! :-) The Charts Since it is useful to keep track of the most viewed pages within the project's scope, it seems like a good idea to continue this feature, which was originally included in last month's issue as a one-off. Satellite was the most popular article of February, up six places from seventh in December. STS-133 was the highest climber in the top 10, up 78 places from 88th. January's most popular article, Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, dropped seven places to eighth. Moon landing remains ahead of moon landing conspiracy theories for the second month in a row. Of the top ten, two articles are featured content, two are listed as Good Articles, and the remaining six are assessed as C-class. № Article Movement 1 Satellite ↑6 (7) 2 Space Shuttle ↑11 (13) 3 NASA ↑7 (10) 4 Neil Armstrong ↓1 (4) 5 Apollo 13 ↑4 (9) 6 Global Positioning System ↓1 (5) 7 International Space Station ↑5 (12) 8 Space Shuttle Challenger disaster ↓7 (1) 9 Apollo 11 ↓3 (6) 10 STS-133 ↑78 (88) For the full list of the top 1,500 popular pages within the project, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Popular pages (or the archived record for February). Selected Article: Europa Europa was a rocket developed by a multinational European programme in the 1960s. Consisting of British, French and German stages, it was intended to provide a European alternative to the US rockets used for the launch of most Western satellites to that date. Although the British Blue Streak first stage performed well on all flights, problems with the French and German stages, as well as the Italian-built payload fairing, resulted in the failure of all multistage test flights and orbital launch attempts. The programme was abandoned after the failure of the Europa II's maiden flight in 1971. The article Europa (rocket), describes it: “ The Europa rocket was an early expendable launch system of the European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO), which was the precursor to the European Space Agency and its Ariane family of launchers. The programme was initiated by the UK and the first launch occurred in August 1967. Tasks were to be distributed between nations: the United Kingdom would provide the first stage (derived from the Blue Streak missile), France would build the second and Germany the third stage. The Europa programme was divided into 4 successive projects : Europa 1: 4 unsuccessful launches Europa 2: 1 unsuccessful launch Europa 3: Cancelled before any launch occurred Europa 4: Study only, later cancelled The project was marred by technical problems. Although the first stage (the British Blue Streak) launched successfully on each occasion, it was the second or third stage that failed. ” The article is currently assessed as start-class, and is missing a lot of information. It also lacks some basic features such as inline citations. Since Europa was a fairly major programme, enough information should be available to produce a much higher quality article, and it could probably be brought up to GA status with enough effort. Published by WikiProject Spaceflight, if you have any content you wish to include in future newsletters, please contribute

You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Spaceflight at 09:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC).__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-03T09:08:00.000Z","author":"MessageDeliveryBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MessageDeliveryBot-2011-03-03T09:08:00.000Z-The_Downlink:_Issue_3","replies":[]}}-->

Just for your reference, because I assume you only read the links I have which were at very awkward moments near the end discussion, showing cases where Jayjg edited talk page posts, here is the link to the more full (actually still re-edited) discussion I initiated with Jayjg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jayjg/Archive_32#Deletion_for_the_wrong_reason:_just_a_remark . If you start at the top and work down you'll see that I put a lot of effort into trying to create a rational discussion, and this was not reciprocated. When I made accusations later of bad faith it was based on analyses of events in that discussion which could be verified, so not WP:NPA. I honestly think your personal comments about me on WP:V were a little quick to have really read this and balanced the evidence enough to make the remark you did.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-03T18:33:00.000Z","author":"Andrew Lancaster","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Andrew_Lancaster-2011-03-03T18:33:00.000Z-The_discussion_about_JOGG","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-03T18:43:00.000Z-Andrew_Lancaster-2011-03-03T18:33:00.000Z"]}}-->

That's the discussion I had linked to, and that's the one I was talking about; I had read most of it. I have no desire to continue this conversation. Mlm42 (talk) 18:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-03T18:43:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-03T18:43:00.000Z-Andrew_Lancaster-2011-03-03T18:33:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Thanks for the notice, although it seems I have beaten you to commenting on both pages :) If you didn't get a chance to look at WP:RUS (our guideline dealing with romanization of Russian), you might want to review it now. You are dead wrong about moving the article about the city, and right on the money with the person (although for a whole different set of reasons) :) Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 3, 2011; 22:05 (UTC)

I've replied to this on your talk page. Mlm42 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-03T22:12:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:12:00.000Z-Korolyov","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:24:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:12:00.000Z"]}}-->

You must have skimmed it, not read it :) Here, from WP:RUS#Place names:

1. When possible, use a conventional English name (as defined below) instead of the default romanization.
2. A conventional name of a place is the name listed in major English dictionaries and should be preferred over default romanization at all times. [emphasis mine—Ё]

That's it. Last I checked, Korolyov wasn't important enough to be included into any major dictionaries. What the official website's URL is doesn't matter in the slightest, and even if the city had a website in English with a different spelling, that still wouldn't have mattered, because they are free to choose from half a dozen different romanization systems (all of which are good, but for different purposes), many of which produce incompatible results. We standardize on one of those systems, and it's BGN/PCGN, which is the industry standard when it comes to romanization of place names in Russia. We shouldn't be inventing new rules when there already is a perfectly good standard, which specifically targets Anglophones.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 3, 2011; 22:20 (UTC)

It doesn't matter much to me, one way or the other, but there's a pretty obvious "common sense" argument I've made at Talk:Korolyov (city). Guidelines sometimes have exceptions. Mlm42 (talk) 22:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-03T22:24:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:24:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:12:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-04T16:29:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:24:00.000Z"]}}-->

Guidelines should allow for exceptions, when there is an obvious benefit to be gained. In this case, however, I fail to see what that benefit might be. The "common sense" scenario you are talking about has an obvious downside; one that WP:RUS accounts for.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 4, 2011; 14:15 (UTC)

Sorry, what's the downside, exactly? Mlm42 (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-04T16:29:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-04T16:29:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-03T22:24:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:05:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-04T16:29:00.000Z"]}}-->

Sorry, missed your question. The downside is that the exception we'd be making does not align with any real-world practices of dealing with similar situations. Common sense approach makes sense when a situation is unique and no industry standards exist; yet in this case there are plenty of documented approaches of dealing with just this kind of situation.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 9, 2011; 16:53 (UTC)

Can you give an example of another situation of this kind, where the city is named after a person, and that person's name does not use the default transliteration? It would be useful to see such an example. Mlm42 (talk) 17:05, 9 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-09T17:05:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":7,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:05:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-04T16:29:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:38:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:05:00.000Z"]}}-->

I already did in previous discussions, but here it is again—Dmitri Mendeleev vs. Mendeleyevsk. Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky vs. Chaykovsky, Perm Krai is also worth a mention.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 9, 2011; 17:18 (UTC)

You mentioned the Mendeleyevsk example, but that seems to be a non-example to me, since the person and town have different names in Russian. The Chaykovsky example is very relevant; thanks for pointing that out.. but there doesn't appear to have been a discussion about that title either. Mlm42 (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-09T17:38:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":9,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:38:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:05:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T18:52:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:38:00.000Z"]}}-->

As for Mendeleyev(sk), the spelling difference in Russian has nothing to do with the "ee"/"eye" distinction in English, so the example is relevant (were the town to be named "Менделеев", the article would have still been under "Mendeleyev"). As for Chaykovsky, the name is compliant with WP:RUS, which makes a discussion pointless (unless you can demonstrate that the conventionality clause is being violated). The relevant discussion, covering all possible cases, took place when WP:RUS was being adopted. That's actually one of the main reasons why we even have our guidelines (and no, I'm not just talking about WP:RUS, I mean all of our guidelines) in place—to make sure that we don't waste time by holding trivial discussions over every single article every single time. When a guideline is based on applicable real-life practices, discussing every article every time serves no purpose. Wikipedia is not a place where editors should devise better ways to standardize things or to improve existing ways by exercising "common sense" (the definition of which varies wildly from one person to another)—we are supposed to observe what reputable organizations do in the field, agree on what the best practice to follow is, document it, and follow it.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 9, 2011; 18:11 (UTC)

Look, I'm not the only one who thinks this. User:Pmanderson pointed out (here) that "Having a city not spelled like its eponym requires a positive reason". Also WP:RUS isn't particularly helpful in this case (because it's not included in dictionaries), but it does say: "When possible, use a conventional English name (as defined below) instead of the default romanization." If a city is named after a person, then I'm saying the conventional English name of the city is the conventional English name of the person - unless there's reason to believe otherwise. This makes sense to me, and I suspect it would make sense to a lot of other Wikipedia editors as well. Mlm42 (talk) 18:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-09T18:52:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":11,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T18:52:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T17:38:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T23:07:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T18:52:00.000Z"]}}-->

People are entitled to have their own opinions, which come in different sizes and qualities. Did you know that before WP:RUS was adopted, some editors had opinions that the transliteration systems developed personally by them is what Wikipedia absolutely needs? As ridiculous as this proposal seems, it was suggested probably on half a dozen different occasions (and I'm not even counting home-brewed "improvements" of existing romanization systems). We schedule (or at least do our best to try to schedule) our activities not around the opinions, but around the existing real-world practices, especially when those are so readily available. There is no need to re-invent the wheel/new romanization practices; they have already been invented and in place for years.

Also, you are misreading WP:RUS again—for place names, "as defined below" refers exactly to the dictionary clause below and nothing else. There is no wiggle room by design—if a place name is not listed in a general-purpose dictionary, then there is no "conventional name" for it, so it needs to be romanized. And since there are many ways to transliterate a place name, WP:RUS gives guidance which one to use as standard default. Note that this same approach would not work for people names, which is why the WP:RUS conventionality clause for people is much more elaborate.

The bottom line of all this is that we do not invent the guidelines, we borrow what works. No single romanization system ever takes into consideration who a place was named after (I already mentioned this, yet for some reason got no comment in response). Neither should we. What can be unclear about that?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 9, 2011; 20:37 (UTC)

But WP:IAR exists for a reason, and that's what I'm claiming applies here. Whether or not a strict reading of the WP:RUS guideline allows it, the IAR policy could apply. If there is consensus among editors to allow an exception in the case of an eponym, then it doesn't matter what reliable sources have to say about it. Consensus among editors is more important. Mlm42 (talk) 23:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-09T23:07:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":13,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-09T23:07:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-09T18:52:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

I was hoping to get Vladimir Komarov's page up to maybe B-class from its current C-rating but Template:WikiProject_Spaceflight/doc seems to have errors on it. I note you have edited it in the past so you may be able to help me. Like... what does this mean: B-Class-6 – Does the article contains the appropriately accessible way? If you can help me, I would be grateful for any assistance. Aakheperure (talk) 11:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-10T11:02:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-10T11:02:00.000Z-B-class_articles","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-11T21:30:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-10T11:02:00.000Z"]}}-->

Thanks for pointing that out; I've fixed the wording. Mlm42 (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-11T21:30:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-11T21:30:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-10T11:02:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Ezhiki's talk page.
Message added 22:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-10T22:56:00.000Z","author":"Ezhiki","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ezhiki-2011-03-10T22:56:00.000Z-B-class_articles","replies":[]}}-->

Template:WikiProject Space has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. JJ98 (Talk) 18:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-11T18:56:00.000Z","author":"Jj98","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jj98-2011-03-11T18:56:00.000Z-Nomination_for_deletion_of_Template:WikiProject_Space","replies":[]}}-->

Hello, Mlm42. You have new messages at Ezhiki's talk page.
Message added 20:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-11T20:18:00.000Z","author":"Ezhiki","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Ezhiki-2011-03-11T20:18:00.000Z-Star_City","replies":[]}}-->

Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Include "ethnicity, gender," to match all other guidelines

Wikilawyers have been trying to drive through a wording loophole in WP:BLP, saying ethnicity and gender of WP:EGRS don't apply to living persons, simply because the two words aren't in the policy. (Apparently, they think it should only apply to dead people.) I see that you have participated on this topic at the Village Pump.

They also are trying to remove the notability, relevance, and self-identification criteria at WT:EGRS, but that's another fight for another day, I'm simply too busy to watch two fronts at the same time.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:31, 11 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-11T21:31:00.000Z","author":"William Allen Simpson","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-William_Allen_Simpson-2011-03-11T21:31:00.000Z-BLP,_ethnicity,_gender","replies":[]}}-->

I have TASS wired photographs that would be good for the Vladimir Komarov article (and other articles) that were published in newspapers internationally, but I am not sure how to go about checking if I can use them or not. I was never able to establish if I could even use the ru-wiki photograph of Varlamov for my en-wiki article. If you have any ideas how to go about this, please tell me. I have photographs, official postcards, and First Day covers and other signed memorabilia for the first 12 cosmonauts, the Apollo-Soyuz test program and the members of Air Force Group 1 who flew. I also have a photograph of the Kosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. Let's start with TASS? Aakheperure (talk) 09:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z-Photographs","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-12T16:44:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z","c-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T20:54:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z"]}}-->

That's a good question.. and I'm not sure the answer. What I recommend doing is asking your question at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions; they seem good and answering these kinds of questions. There are several postcards in Yuri Gagarin's article which are tagged with this copyright license, having been uploaded by someone owns the postcards. I agree that the images you have would be extremely useful for these articles, so I definitely recommend asking at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions; they might want you to provide a good amount of information about where the images actually came from. If you upload the images first, then be sure to include a link in your question. Good luck! Mlm42 (talk) 16:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-12T16:44:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-12T16:44:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

• Great information! Thank you! I have posted on the page you suggested, providing all the information listed on the images (which in this case is extensive luckily). There's probably a lot of photos in my collection I cannot use, eg a very rare 10x8 signed Komarov from I acquired from a former VVS collector, which is a pity but can't be helped. I am hoping the TASS photos can be used as they are of the Voskhod 1 mission and contain all crew members and images transmitted from space so they could be used across 4 articles (crew and mission page). The images also contain Brezhnev and Valentina Tereshkova, so are of historical importance elsewhere. Fingers crossed.Aakheperure (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-12T20:54:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T20:54:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-12T09:40:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

I'd like to work on Yuri Gagarin's page in the lead up to the 50th anniversary of his flight, but am hesitant to take on such a high profile article. Can you advise me where I can get feedback regarding my editing (Vladimir Komarov) so I have an idea about what could be done to improve that page and what things I need to fix about my editing style? Should I edit another page first?

Thank you for your words of support and encouragement so far, it has been very much appreciated.Aakheperure (talk) 06:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z-Article_Feedback","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-13T18:45:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","c-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","c-Aakheperure-2011-03-15T09:08:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z"]}}-->

I think you should go for it. I've been trying to improve some of the mission articles, like Vostok 1, Vostok programme, and related articles. I made a few improvements to Yuri Gagarin, but more could be done. Generally, your editing is great; especially your use of inline citations. In the Pavel Belyayev article, I changed the citation style slightly, to reduce duplication; you don't have to write out the whole reference each time you reference it. I find this style is both easier to read, and easier to type.

I personally found that when I edit human spaceflight articles, I have to remind myself not to editorialize; the sources, such as Burgess and Hall, can use phrases like "Belyayev was affectionately known as Pasha", but at Wikipedia we should make it more neutral, so the word affectionately isn't really appropriate. I rewrote this to: "Belyayev was known as Pasha to his family.". Another piece of advice is to build the web, by linking to other articles. I added some wikilinks where appropriate in the Pavel Belyayev article.. but sometimes it wasn't clear where it should link.. for example which Leninsky District did he grow up in? And where is "Minkovo"?

One way of getting feedback to Vladimir Komarov is to nominate it as a good article, when you think it's ready. I think it's pretty close; you may want to have a look over the Good article criteria, and when you feel confident it satisfies the criteria, follow the nominating instructions.

Basically, with the 50 year anniversary less than a month away, improvements to Yuri Gagarin's article would be very welcome! :D Mlm42 (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-13T18:45:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-13T18:45:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

• Great suggestions and thanks for modelling how to do the citations, I knew I was doing it wrong, but I'm still learning. I would really like to work on the mission pages for Vostok 1-6 and Voskhod 1-2 as those are my main field of interest so I would like to work with you on this if you are in interested. Aakheperure (talk) 06:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-14T16:55:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z","c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:17:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z"]}}-->

I'm definitely interested. I didn't know much about them, which is why I started learning about the precursor missions; as I learned about those, I added to the Vostok programme article, as well as the specific articles like Korabl-Sputnik 5. I think the main Vostok programme and Voskhod programme articles should have priority, with more detailed information going into the individual mission articles. Mlm42 (talk) 16:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-14T16:55:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-14T16:55:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

I know I am probably not the person you would like to see after we got to a wrong start in another place, but I thought I might be helpful here for a change :) I just wanted to clarify something about "Leninsky District" mentioned above. Does the source really say "Leninsky" and not "Ledengsky"? The village of Minkovo, where Belyayev went to school in the 1930s, is located in what is now Babushkinsky District of Vologda Oblast, and Babushkinsky District was called Ledengsky until 1941. As far as I know, there was never a "Leninsky" District in either Vologda Oblast or the entities that preceded it, but the two spellings look kind of similar, especially to a foreign eye, so I wouldn't be surprised if Burgess and Hall made a mistake. "Leninsky" means something named after Lenin, while "Ledengsky" refers to a place on the Ledenga River.

Another comment I wanted to make is about "Pasha". "Pasha" is a common diminutive form of Pavel—I'd say close to 100% of Russians named "Pavel" were addressed as "Pasha" at some point in their lives. Seems too trivial to warrant a mention as it bears no significant meaning. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 14, 2011; 17:07 (UTC)

I see; good point, it looks like Burgess and Hall made a mistake.. they definitely say "Leninsky District", but this biography (repeated here in English appears to show they are wrong. Thanks for pointing this out.

As for the "Pasha" remark, this isn't obvious to English speakers, even though it may be obvious to Russian speakers; so there's no harm in mentioning it. Mlm42 (talk) 01:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T01:17:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:17:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-14T06:34:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:34:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:17:00.000Z"]}}-->

Do you have a reference for your "Ledengsky" remark? I couldn't verify this.. Mlm42 (talk) 01:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T01:34:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:34:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T01:17:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

• To (yo?) Mln42 is absolutely correct. The name Pasha must be clarified because it is used in a quotation in the article. It is not readily known by English speakers and provides context as to who this 'Pasha' is in the citation. 100% of Russian speakers might indeed be known in this manner. However, this is the English wikipedia and very few English speakers would know that Pasha = Pavel, in fact I could not name anyone who knows this in my circle of university educated colleagues. It is not trivial and it is essential for this article. If you want to write the article yourself please do so instead of constantly criticising me, because I am really sick of your negativity when I am trying to improve articles on a topic I have spent many years researching and have, indeed, lectured on the topic at an Australian University; not that I have to justify myself to you. The quality of my editing should speak for itself. By the way, its too trivial. Not 'to'. Aakheperure (talk) 09:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T09:08:00.000Z","author":"Aakheperure","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Aakheperure-2011-03-15T09:08:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-13T06:35:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:25:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-15T09:08:00.000Z"]}}-->

"Ledengsky" I can source no problem—I have plenty of sources confirming that Minkovo is located in Babushkinsky District, and that Babushkinsky District was called "Ledengsky" in the 1930s. If you need me to add these sources somewhere, just let me know; I'll do it.

On "Pasha", I am stunned beyond words that Aakheperure would accuse me of "negativity" and of "constant criticism". Wasn't the intent of your original thread to ask for general feedback? Granted, you didn't ask me, and granted, it was me who butted into your discussion here, which can be interpreted as impolite (and, if so, I apologize), but I have no idea how what I said can be classified as "negativity", "criticism", or questioning your competence in the topic (??!!). I simply pointed out that calling "Pasha" a person named Pavel is just as trivial for Russians as calling "Bill" a person named William for the Anglophones—and the latter bit would be deemed too trivial to include in, say, an article about someone named William in the Russian Wikipedia, even if it were a part of a quotation (but I guess I gotta be careful with making such remarks, lest you accuse me of disparaging the intellectual level of the Australian academia and glorifying the erudition of the Russian peasants like me). If you don't think it's trivial, well, fine by me; see if I care! I pointed out what I thought should be pointed out, and if you choose to not use that particular bit of info, that's your right, even though I still think that you might at least consider rephrasing the sentence—the way it is structured now kind of makes readers think that "Pasha" was some kind of special nickname his family and friends came up with, when in fact it was a simple diminutive. Whatever.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 15, 2011; 15:32 (UTC)

Ezhiki, you were right to point that Pasha is the diminutive of Pavel (which is also stated in Pasha (disambiguation)).. but I don't think this is an issue worth getting worked up over. Sometimes people are called different things; their articles often mention this.. big deal? Consider the article John F. Kennedy, which mentions the diminutive "Jack" in the opening sentence. I don't see anything wrong with this. The only downside of mentioning "Pasha" is that is draws some "but that's obvious!" criticism; this is far outweighed by the upside, which is that some people will learn something about Pavel Belyayev they didn't know. I've now even added a note to the article stating it's the diminutive form. Mlm42 (talk) 16:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T16:25:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:25:00.000Z-Aakheperure-2011-03-15T09:08:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:59:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:25:00.000Z"]}}-->

Well, I wasn't really getting worked up over "Pasha", I was getting worked up over the fact that my comments, which I genuinely intended to be helpful, were called "negative" and critical of Aakheperure's competence. Normally I am a pretty thick-skinned guy, but I've been bombarded with all kinds of crap over the past week... but that's still no excuse. Sorry.

If you don't mind my pointing out another thing, I see that you've changed "Leninsky" to "Babushikinsky", but that's not entirely correct. The district was not called "Babushkinsky" until 1941 (and there was no Vologda Oblast until 1937). Also, while Chelishchevo and Minkovo are now both in Babushkinsky District, when Belyayev was born, the former was a part of Roslyatinsky District (of Northern Dvina Governorate), and the latter was a part of Ledengsky District (of Vologda Okrug of Northern Krai). Amidst a number of other administrative changes, Roslyatinsky District was merged into Ledengsky in 1931. All this is definitely too unimportant for an article about the cosmonaut, but the birth reference at least needs to be corrected. Please let me know if I can help.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 15, 2011; 16:51 (UTC)

Feel free to jump in, and correct it as you see fit; I was just using the wording from the sources. Generally I think it's more useful to readers to say the current name of a place, and then maybe in brackets say (then known as something else). This seems to be the convention across Wikipedia. Mlm42 (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T16:59:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:59:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:25:00.000Z","replies":["c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T17:35:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:59:00.000Z"]}}-->

I won't be jumping in until I get assurances from Aakheperure that he's not going to see my edits as another insult to his intelligence. Better have incorrect information (not that it makes much difference in this case) than lose another editor, eh? Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 15, 2011; 17:03 (UTC)

Okay; I changed the wording slightly.. is it more accurate now? Mlm42 (talk) 17:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-03-15T17:35:00.000Z","author":"Mlm42","type":"comment","level":7,"id":"c-Mlm42-2011-03-15T17:35:00.000Z-Mlm42-2011-03-15T16:59:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->

It's better now, but I'd change it further to "in what is now called the Babushkinsky District, Vologda Oblast", because "called" implies only the name change, while here there were also numerous administrative changes (I also removed the definite article on purpose—using it here is not grammatically incorrect, but not using it is equally correct, and the latter is what we normally practice when referring to the Russian districts by name). Also, the link to the district needs to be changed (currently it leads to a set index), and the appropriate lines in the lead and in the infobox need to be corrected as well—and with those I'm not sure you can use the same "is now called" trick. Specifically, in the infoboxes the places' jurisdictions are normally given in terms used at the time of the event.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 15, 2011; 18:02 (UTC)