Talk:Phobos 2

High quality processed images from the Phobos 2 mission external link is dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.250.0.199 (talk) 01:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Phobos 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150717180620/http://www.strykfoto.org/phobos2.htm to http://www.strykfoto.org/phobos2.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060316104137/http://www.astrosurf.com/nunes/explor/explor_ph2.htm to http://astrosurf.com/nunes/explor/explor_ph2.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

When did this thing enter mars orbit?

 * planetary society says 29 January 1989
 * Russian space web says 21 January 1989
 * NASA suggests 30 January 1989
 * Russian Planetry Exploration History, Development, Legacy and Prospects says 15:55 27 January 1989 and 29 January 1989

©Geni (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Spectral Properties and Heterogeneity of Phobos from Measurements by Phobos 2
Can be found at:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170812073654/www.lesia.obspm.fr/perso/stephane-erard/se/publis/Phobos1996.pdf

©Geni (talk) 14:35, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The UFO photo
I made a section about the infamous photo in this article many years ago, and it was deleted. However, I still think it is a subject worthy of discussion. Even if most of us who visit Wikipedia do not believe the UFO claims are true, the "claims" themselves are definitely fact, and therefore relevant to the history of Phobos 2. In fact, one could argue that the UFO stories are the thing Phobos 2 is most famous for. I would imagine many people came to this article looking specifically for information on the "UFO photo", and might be disappointed to find none. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.166.188 (talk) 03:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I cannot agree more than this. A list of good sources can be found at the Springer article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:11, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I came here to read on the mass in the photo, and see there is nowt here. It seems odd.Halbared (talk) 10:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)