Talk:Kwangmyŏngsŏng programme/Archive 1

Factually Inaccurate
This article fails to mention anything about how every one of the North's attempts have failed. The recent attempt did not put anything into orbit.. It crashed and burned. Cs302b (talk) 17:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Still orbiting?
Does North Korea claim that this satellite is still in orbit of Earth? DarthVad e r 07:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Copy/paste
The change in font indicates a direct copy and paste from a Chinese source (including quotes still in Chinese translation, not Korean or English translation) that has then been translated into stilted English by an editor. Unfortunately I don't have fluent enough Chinese ability to see if the sources are reliable or if the POV-leaning content accurately reflects the content. Any check on this, as well as any astronomy minded editors able to use online tracking sources to check up on Kwangmyongsong's existence would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.48.153.241 (talk) 04:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid online tracking sources could have been of no significant help in this case, as they are known to have uncomplete (self-censored) databases; but an astronomy versed editor could have done it. —222.214.45.162 二〇〇九年三月二十一日 (六)   十六时三十二 (北京时间)  —Preceding undated comment added 08:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC).
 * Assuming you mean that they could have tried to track it themselves, No. That would have been "original research" and we have to rely on published and reliable sources. Rmhermen (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "published and reliable sources": this is exactly where the problem is. And is at best an euphemism for stories only published to be believed as true for the youngest of the readers. By the way, radio amateurs could have received the broadcast at 27 MHz. —222.214.45.162（talk） 二〇〇九年三月二十二日 （星期日）农历二月廿六 十七时三十三 （标准北京中央时间）  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.214.45.162 (talk) 09:29, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to imply anything about the ability of amateur radio buffs to receive the signal, only that Wikipedia needs to rely on published reliable reports that someone anywhere actually did receive them. Rmhermen (talk) 06:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Chinese?
Virtually everything in parenthesis as well as the Kim Il Sung quote are actually Chinese, not Korean...! Jpatokal (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's actually hanmun （漢文）. —125.68.47.58（talk） 公历二〇〇九年三月廿九日 （星期日）农历三月初三 十六时三十 （标准北京中央时间）  —Preceding undated comment added 08:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC).

This is not hanmun:

""Moreover, on February 25, 2009, the Iranian News Agency reported the statement of Choe Tae-bok, a high ranking DPRK official as saying: “ 	我们把伊朗的所有的成功都看做是自己的成功.

We consider all Iranian technological achievements as our own achievements.""

I would really find it strange for a DPRK official saying '아문파이낭적소유적성공도간주시자기적성공.' It doesn't make sense in Korean, and it is vernacular Chinese (not to mention it is in simplified characters). Of course, it is entirely possible that the DPRK official was speaking in Chinese, but I haven't checked the source for that.125.238.23.58 (talk) 06:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Edits by User:222.214.45.162
I reverted some edits by User:222.214.45.162, which contain some WP:OR and WP:POV problems.

First, please show reliable sources for your contribution. He rely excessively on KCNA or Chinese news media. This North Korean rocket launching is broadly covered by the Western media, which are regarded as more reliable sources than North Korean and Chinese one.

Second, Your edits show some inappropriate contents with no reference such as:
 * Following the test, Japan's Self Defense Forces even sent three destroyers and patrol aircraft to extensively search the impact areas in the Pacific for wreckage of the alleged "missile and its warhead". No wreckage was ever found.
 * Meanwhile, as the annual joint US-South Korea military exercises, code-named Key Resolve and Foal Eagle were held in South Korea from March 9 to 20, large-scale DPRK-targeted war exercises which replaced the codename of RSOI, the US and Japan have threatened to take action, should the launch look like anything other than a satellite. Consequently, the official KCNA news citing a spokesman for the General Staff of the Korean People's Army (KPA) reported on March 9, that the DPRK vowed to launch retaliatory strike operations including targets in the US, Japananese, and South Korean territories: "Shooting down our satellite or space launch vehicle, which are for peaceful purposes, will precisely mean a war." Moreover, KCNA also denounced the shippment of large quantity of nuclear fuel from France to Japan in what it described as a dangerous move by the Japanese to covertly attempting to develop illegal nuclear weapons by first stockpiling nuclear fuel from overseas which could latter be weaponized. 
 * Then in a major and embarrassing mediatic blunder, the Japanese government first mistakenly announced that the KSCT fired a rocket on April 4th 2009, at about 12 p.m. Tokyo time, sending nationwide emergency warnings, only to be to be retracted less than five minutes later, and blaiming the JSDF FPS-5 radar's faulty detection and tracking abilities. Japan's NHK television channel even went to give details of the alleged flight profile. 


 * I think that I gave more references (a record, sort of speak) than those who plage wikipedia with obvious inaccuracies. They are reliable sources, as most readers have witnessed and appreciated, not only in this present article but also in past major contributions.


 * Furthermore, what is shocking in this case is the need to provide reference for accurate corrective informations, while previous editors with obvious nonsense were never asked to bother to do so. By the way, it is obvious that all this is only a mere excuse as you simply don't like my sense of objectivity ,which has not remain unnoticed, and even major western weekly magazines such as Valeurs actuelles have already forwarded my work as in their February 19th, 2009, edition. Thus I invite you to rethink your behaviour before reverting my contributions. —222.214.45.162（talk） 公历二〇〇九年四月五日 （星期日）农历三月初十 十七时五十 （标准北京中央时间）  —Preceding undated comment added 09:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC).

Russian/North American sources
Seems that the two sources are contradictory, Russian Space Agency saying one thing, NORAD another. Are they both still sticking to their stories? Esn (talk) 09:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Spacro
How is it related to this.?-- '''yousaf465'  10:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Sourcing needed for Russian claim
Far better sourcing is needed for the claim Russia reported the launch of Kwangmyŏngsŏng-1 is a success. Currently it's sourced to a Chinese BBS with some rather dodgy images, in other words almost definitely not a RS. I found which while not a RS, suggests the claim Russia reported the launch was a success have never been collaborated. Unless a better preferably recent source can be found, the claim Russia reported the launch a success should be removed Nil Einne (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now removed the poorly sourced claims Nil Einne (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)