Talk:Rocketplane XP

Reference to NF-104
This says "The XP is seeking challenges Lockheed did not attempt with the NF-104" and NF-104 is a link to the page 'NF-104' which is a redirect to the page 'F-104 Starfighter'.

I have changed the NF-104 to be a link to the page 'Lockheed NF-104A' which I think is what is meant.

If that is correct then I think that page 'NF-104' s/b removed. However I am new around here and I don't want to be too bold and also I don't know how to edit redirect pages.

FerdinandFrog (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * What you did was exactly right, this article was written before the NF-104A article, it's quite common to find links to the wrong page as the Wiki grows. There is no NF-104 page as such, redirects help to take people to the article that they are looking for so nothing to worry about there. Have fun. Nimbus (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I understand the concept of a redirect, my question was about the mechanism by which they are implemented.  You say that there is no NF-104 page as such but there must be something that does the redirect and that s/b fixed as well.  Currently 'F-104', 'NF-104' & 'NF-104A' all take the reader to F-104, when the last two should, IMHO, take the reader to Lockheed NF-104A.
 * FerdinandFrog (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Right again! I have fixed it. If you type 'NF-104' into the search box it will now take you to Lockheed NF-104A, look just underneath the title and it say 'redirected from NF-104, that takes you to the redirect page which you can edit yourself if you find any more like this. More advice here: Help:Redirect. Interesting that this article (Rocketplane XP) says it would be an improvement on the NF-104 when the two aircraft have different purposes (single seat trainer/passenger carrier), can't see that they could be compared directly myself. Did it ever get built? Cheers Nimbus (talk) 11:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Doh! I have seen the 'redirected from ...' text a number of times (including this one) and seen that it is in the hyperlink colour but I did not put two & two together and realise that there was an actual page containing the redirect. Thanks for the explanation
 * The comparison to the NF-104 seemed odd to me as well, which is why I clicked through to see if there was anything there that made it clear.
 * Other than the fact that it is not flying (if it was the news would have covered it) I have no idea of the status. I was looking at  COTS and got to here from there, saw the error and did my bit to fix it.  On the  Rocketplane Limited  page there is some more info about dates.  Do you think that should that be here?  As well?  Instead?
 * FerdinandFrog (talk) 17:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Another way to avoid the redirect is to correct the article name in the text but in this case the word Lockheed is already in the sentence so I left it. I'm not doing much 'wikying' at the moment and space is not my area of interest, not sure about this article, seems the project is 'stalled' which is not surprising as it is pretty ambitious, best to wait and see what happens. NASA seem to have ceased grant payments to the company. Have fun, you can always drop a line on my talk page if you get stuck, I'm no expert but I've got the basics! Cheers Nimbus (talk) 22:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Reference to EADS Astrium Space Tourism Project
In the See also section the article says that the EADS project is a copy of this, which seemed a little unlikely to me. The article about the EADS project also makes the same claim but has a citation needed tag, so I have added one here as well. FerdinandFrog (talk) 16:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Need Picture
I'll see if we can use one under a fair use license. --Craigboy (talk) 08:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)