User talk:WDGraham/Archive 2010

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Space agency vs. program
I asked about this on the Roscosmos talk page as well as on the space flight portal many months ago but no one replied. I really need a second opinion. Do you think we should have separate articles for the agency and the Russian space program? Currently the Roscosmos article discusses both. But this is misleading, since the agency doesn't have much to do with every aspect of the program, such as military launches and the space industry. My solution would be to move most of the material from Roscosmos to a new article Russian space program (currently a redirect), and either let Roscosmos focus strictly on the agency itself, or make Roscosmos a chapter in of Russian space program. I would really appreciate your opinion on this and any advice you can give. Offliner (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have replied on Talk:Russian Federal Space Agency --G W … 12:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

TLS newbie
You should probably revisit 2010 in spaceflight, there seems to be something wrong with it. Also, you might want to pre-emptively create 2012 in spaceflight per this since I expect "his" incarnation of 2012 to look nothing like our standards and more like what 2014 in spaceflight currently is. -MBK004 04:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I've been meaning to get started again on working on WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight/Timeline Status, perhaps you would like to update this? -MBK004 04:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 2012 now exists, and I'll have a look at the TLS status board later. --G W … 12:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for dealing with that promptly, there is no rush on the status board, but 2010 in spaceflight does have a problem with its templates that I can't seem to fix. -MBK004 13:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Apparently the newbie is not getting the message. 2013 in spaceflight and 2014 in spaceflight are now at AFD. -MBK004 05:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you GW for telling me about the limit and how to get started, thank you. Mickman1234 (talk) 21:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

New Luch satellites...
Hi GW, was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping out with the current FAC push for International Space Station by letting us know at Talk:International Space Station what source you used for your edit that added two Luch satellite launches to 2011 in spaceflight? Thanks, Colds7ream (talk) 19:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Have replied there. --G W … 20:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
I also had to revert an AGF addition of flags to 1974 in spaceflight since he was mixing the two different styles together. I'm going to get started back at converting to the new style next week. -MBK004 05:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied there. Coincidentally, I restarted conversion of 1965 in spaceflight yesterday. --G W … 12:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Kosmos
Template:Kosmos has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have suggested speedy deletion under G7. --G W … 10:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Naming conventions under attack? -MBK004 01:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Strange proposal. He doesn't even explain why he wants to move it. Replied there. --G W … 09:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TLS-H
Template:TLS-H has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:20, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ugh, I've opined that this is not an easy replacement and takes time to do and special knowledge of the template. I've also let it be known that I can delete them when their use is officially done. -MBK004 05:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Deep Space Rendezvous
I've noticed that these are lacking all of the flybys of Phobos that happen apparently every year from the orbiters around Mars (Mars Express, MRO). If we included them we would even have a DSR for 1977 (which currently has none) with the Viking Orbiter 1 flyby of Phobos that was the old world record that was just beaten by Mars Express. I am interested in your thoughts on this since I'm unsure if we could find the referencing/data for this. I have although added the 67 km Mars Express flyby for this year to 2010, but JSR lists the others. -MBK004 20:43, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that we list the ones we can find dates for, and for others we use a note similar to the one used for Cassini flybys which we have no information on. --G W … 22:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That is what I was thinking as well, and on that matter, JSR has a Cassini flyby of Mimas on 13 February 2010 which is the closest ever of that moon, but the distance (9520 km) makes it improbable that the flyby was targeted. -MBK004 00:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added all of the flybys for this year of Mars Express to 2010 since JSR listed them from the ESA website, as well as the Viking flyby in 1977, but have not done any of the other notations. I'm now going to see if I can dig up anything on MRO and flybys, but I would be appreciative if you could add the notation to the other years about the flybys like the Cassini mention. -MBK004 15:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * And I forgot completely about Deimos (moon), Viking Orbiter 2 made a flyby of that one. So the flybys should notate both Phobos and Deimos. -MBK004 16:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Deimos is in a much higher orbit, so I'm guessing untargeted flybys will have been rarer. --G W … 22:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, on closer examination Phobos is higher than most of the probes as well. I suspect the Viking flybys were targeted. Mars Express is the only currently operational spacecraft that goes anywhere near Phobos. I would suggest studying orbital data for spacecraft to determine which ones were capable of making flybys before adding notes. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!
Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note
You are receiving this note because you participated in this TFD. Some of these have been re-nominated here, where you may wish to comment. Thanks, –<font face="verdana" color="black">xeno talk  14:28, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

 * I hate having to delete notable subjects for this reason, but don't have time or breadth of background to replace that much of it myself. (Spent two days working on a replacement for one article recently; brought my janitorial work to a bit of a standstill!) It's always a pleasure for me to find an article ready to go instead. On behalf of the copyright cleanup crew on Wikipedia, I thank you. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words. I've just put a replacement up for Pratham (satellite) as well, and I'll try and sort Vitsat out in the next couple of days. I don't really check the copyright problems and cleanup pages as often as I should, so if you see any other spaceflight or rocketry articles tagged, feel free to let me know and I'll try to do something about them. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 21:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Very much appreciated! I'll try to keep that in mind; fortunately, we don't see a lot of these, except in conjunction with the current CCI for Contributor copyright investigations/20100216. That one's almost complete, following which I expect to drop back to our previous low levels. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Collision avoidance (spacecraft)
I copied the article over almost word for word without touching the Standardise dialect, so I don't see how en-GB was the standardise dialect before the merger. Additionaly, it is largely refering to the International Space Station, in which the major englishspeaking partner is NASA with en-US. Aalox (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You changed the spelling of "manoeuvre" to "maneuver". I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with regards to the ISS, but if you are saying that only the ISS performs CAMs then that would be incorrect, and if you are saying that the collision avoidance article should only refer to this ISS, then I don't see why that is a good idea. Either way, the issue of dialects for ISS-related articles was discussed ad nauseam last year on Talk:International Space Station, and in the end it was found that there was no consensus to use any particular dialect. The ISS article itself uses British English. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I did not change the spelling of any words in this article. As far the ISS is concerned, I was pointing out that the most notable CAMs are performed by the ISS and supporting spacecraft and it is a major part of this article. Aalox (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Apologies. I must have missed the anon before you doing that. If I hadn't of missed it I'd have reverted his edit as vandalism anyway. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 16:40, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Apologies as well, I see now that you originally wrote the article in British English. I had incorrectly assumed that you were making the change out of the blue, your userbox stating the dislike for American English contributed to that assumption.Aalox (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:In the news/NCCA basketball
Hello,

I was wonder if you could take a look at the ITN nomination for the NCAA basketball tournament and reconsider your !vote. About 20 international links have been added to prove this event gets international coverage. I can add many more, if needed.

Thanks for your consideration, ThaddeusB (talk) 20:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Docked time in space shuttle info box
Hey GW, I was wondering if it is possible to put the docked time in the info box for space shuttle missions? I know it is done for ISS expeditions and I think it should be done for shuttle missions, as a lot of the missions work is done while docked. Is this feasable? Is it worth it? I am not sure and I would like your opinion on it and if it is, if you could help?--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 17:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

FYI: Merge proposed
FYI, I'm sure you would be interested in this merge proposal concerning X-37B OTV-1: Talk:Boeing_X-37 -MBK004 04:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

GSLV Mk.II D3
I noticed you edited an article I last edited GSAT-4. You moved the image to a better location. I was wondering if you could help me do something similar on the Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle page. I added an image to the GSLV Mk.II section, but it seems to show up elsewhere. Could you please help?

Thanks --LogicDictates (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a display issue caused by the large number of right-aligned images in the article. I would recommend cutbacks in the numbers of redundant fair use images in the article. Please see my comment on the talk page. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 13:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh! I am sorry must have been a mistake, anyways thanks for restoring. Shashank Reddy.P {talk} 16:23, 15 April 2010 {UTC}
 * Okay. No problem --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 16:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010
I have removed your warning from my talk page. I was annoyed because the information refuting the claim that said satellite being lost has routinely been posted in discussion pages and edit summaries and has been reinstated more than once. In addition, throwing in the threat to have me blocked seems unwarranted and provocative. Vedant (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The "threat" was merely a procedural warning template which I decided to use since you had left an abusive edit summary, and used the words "moron" and "dumbass" with regards to other editors. Since reliable sources can be found for the allegations that the satellite was lost, those allegations should be mentioned, however the official denial should be mentioned as well. In either case, the GSLV article is not the best place for descriptions of activities which occurred after the launch phase of the mission had ended. My restoration of the comment earlier was simply due to its removal being the unexplained removal of cited information by a user whose other edits implied that he or she was attempting to push an agenda. I was more concerned over their attempt to downplay the underperformance during the launch than their attempt to hide the later (alleged) problems with the satellite. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no complaints with your revert with regards with the TAUVEX satellite not being on GSLV because the indigenous cryogenic engine was not powerful enough to lift it in to space nor was I labeling you a "dumbass" or "moron" although perhaps my words were ill chosen. Nonetheless, I have no objection to both pieces of information in the article. If you also note, I did not revert or contest your edit to the article. My only objection was the introduction of the claim that somehow the satellite lost five years of its life despite the fact that it had been removed twice. The encyclopedia works best when people try to work together and ofcourse do proper research before introducing dubious and untrue claims (again, not directed at you). Vedant (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

TLS updates
GW, I know you're probably busy, god knows I am, but I have noticed that recently a few editors have been updating 2010 in spaceflight, but they have been leaving launches as TBD splattered throughout the list when they do not launch as planned. When you get a chance, perhaps a thorough update of 2010, 2011 and 2012 is in order? -MBK004 02:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm planning to give it a shot over the weekend or early next week. I'll sort out launches upto the current date right away though. By the way, I notice you reverted an edit by . You might want to keep an eye on him, as from his previous edits it looks like he might be trying to push a pro-ISRO point of view. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:42, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ I figured on the POV, but the single level 3 warning I left seemed to do the trick. You might want to be aware of this discussion. Apparently an IP whom I have reverted twice in the removal of Launching/SLV from the GSLV article is now calling it moronic on the talk page, demands to know why it is being used and is proposing that the whole system be scrapped entirely due to its being moronic. On top of that he is implying that we are being lazy. I'd normally respond, but I'm rather heated at the moment due to real-life and don't want to BITE, perhaps you'd like to respond in my stead? -MBK004 03:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. He seems to have completely missed the point of the tag. I'd say we're coming up on the point at which they can be removed anyway though. I'll give it until tomorrow and if there aren't any more developments I'll pull them. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 09:18, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now another editor has popped up at Talk:GSAT-4 and Template talk:Launching/SLV We really need a guideline page we can direct editors to for situations like this.. I'd say that the situation is to the point where we can safely pull the template. The POV pusher is back at the GSLV article, this time with an account:, but he has cited the ISRO press release, which makes me weary of reverting. Perhaps you can sort that out? -MBK004 04:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll look into proposing a more formal guideline. I've dealt with the GSLV issue, and I've recycled the template for the next PSLV. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:15, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Docked time in space shuttle info box
Hey GW, I asked this about a week ago, but was archived before you were able to give a response, so I will ask again. I was wondering if it is possible to put the docked time in the info box for space shuttle missions? I know it is done for ISS expeditions and I think it should be done for shuttle missions, as a lot of the missions work is done while docked. Is this feasible? Is it worth it? Another place I think it could work is in the mission parameters section, where the docking/undocking times and total time docked could be added. I am not sure if it would work or be overloading the articles and I would like your opinion on it and if it is, if you could help?--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 23:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've copied the fields across from . I've inserted three docking options, which should accommodate Soyuz T-15, as I think Soyuz missions use the same template, and hence should be treated the same. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you GW. The help is much appreciated!!--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 12:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry to bother you again, I just seen the next and previous missions aren't displaying in the info box. I checked a few missions and its on all pages. I don't know what has happened, all the code on the shuttle mission pages looks like it should. It was there last night but has disappeared this morning and nothing has really changed that I can see would cause it to do this. I went to STS-78 and went as far back as your edit to add the crew table template and its not showing up on that diff. Again, appreciate all the help!!--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 12:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 14:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you once again GW!!--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 14:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Launch tags
Good morning! I've responded and have a few suggestions of my own. -MBK004 07:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good morning to you as well. I have replied there. One of your suggestions was actually implemented several months ago. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've also been thinking about what we will do for Vega (will it fly often enough to warrant its own tag, or can the spare handle it as well). -MBK004 22:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest using spare until its launch rate picks up, if it ever does then we can create one for it. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Progress articles
I know it's been a while, and we are behind on these. So much so that someone else just created Progress M-04M, but it needs to be rescued quickly since it will no doubt be tagged for deletion shortly since it is just an infobox and nothing else. Perhaps you can help? -MBK004 18:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've put an underconstruction tag on it to discourage deletion. I'll sort it out before I get on with splitting Protons. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 20:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. It's now a fairly respectable stub, like most of the other Progress missions. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 20:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Not quite, the same user has now created Progress M-05M. -MBK004 01:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. I doubt if I can find enough information to fill out 06M, so if he creates that I would advise you to consider whether it would be practical to speedy it under CSD A1, without prejudice to recreation once sufficient content can be found. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:36, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * He has created it, and I'm inclined to let it stand, but it would be best if you were to ask him not to create any more until they are much closer to launch. The user in question is -MBK004 03:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. If he creates any more, I'll merge them into the main Progress article. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 06:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I did not know that Wikipedia contributors create Progress articles just one week before a launch. (I created M-06M since (1) for shuttle missions/ISS expeditions there are pages for many future missions (2) The launch dates of M-06M appears on NASA ISS upcoming schedule). I read some of the Progress articles latetly and found that there were no pages for Progress flights beyond M-03M (example: Progress_M-04M was launched on 3 February 2010, but I only created the page on April 25). Progress M-05M is due to be launched today (28th) and I created it on the 26 th. It is true that I only added the info boxes but thought of adding some details later after reading Roscosmos/NASA sites. I wont create any more Progress pages till they are launched, also will try to find information about them. It would be helpful to know whether Roscosmos images can be uploaded into Wikiepdia with copyright violation. Currently, there is a big disparity (information/images/vidoes) in pages between the US Space Program and the Russian Space Program. Most of the information/images that appear in Wikipedia pages on Russian space related articles are due to NASA information (I may be wrong). Another point is that most of the Russian Cosmonaut pages are incomplete and has very little information. (This applies to some cosmonaut bios who are scheduled to fly to the ISS in the coming time) Thanks for adding information onto Progress_M-04M and M-05M pages Kurun (talk) 08:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * They're usually created when enough information is available, which is usually around a week before launch. I don't know why M-04M had not been created sooner. Shuttle articles were generally created earlier because more was known about them earlier. Roskosmos images can only be used under the non-free content criteria, but they can be used if their use meets those criteria. The disparity in content between US and Russian articles is mostly due to greater openness on the parts of NASA and to some extent the US military, compared with their Russian counterparts. For example most NASA images can be used freely for any purpose, whereas Roskosmos images can only be used in accordance with copyright (in terms of Wikipedia, this means NASA images can be used anywhere, but Roskosmos images can only be used if it can be proven that their inclusion in an article meets the criteria that I mentioned above). I agree that NASA historical information on Russian programmes is overused, and in some cases it can lead to poor accuracy. I'm currently trying to deal with a large number of misnamed articles where names used by the US government to identify Russian satellites have been presented as the satellites' official names, and the problem there is largely because NASA is presenting them as such. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for providing information about the Roscosmos image policy. I totally agree with you on the greater openness of NASA compared to its Russian counterpart. As a result, some of the Wiki pages on the Russian space program/cosmonaut information are either missing or incomplete.Kurun (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to start a chess match with me.
Tisane (talk) 09:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, see User:GW Simulations/Chess/Game 5. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Delta II 7920
Um: 2011_in_spaceflight and List_of_Thor_and_Delta_launches_(2010-2019). -MBK004 20:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Can't read my own handwriting today. I had it down as a 7320. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 20:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Different LVs
Could you please differentiate the LM-3B and LM-3B/E since they are different rockets. In the TLS and other space pages? Take a look at http://www.cgwic.com.cn/LaunchServices/LaunchVehicle/LM3B.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.61.55 (talk) 22:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ for TLS, will look into others later. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 06:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Very nice and hope you can look at the other articles mentioning soon since you know where you look and are more expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.21.140 (talk) 23:02, 5 May 2010
 * I'll do the rest as I come across them. I doubt if there are many. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Your move
Tisane (talk) 06:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Galaxy 15
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

ISS info box
Hey GW, Colds7ream has proposed at Template talk:Infobox space expedition, after I asked a question and asked his opinion, that the ISS expedition info box be tweaked so that the launch/landing date options be changed to start/end dates. The theroy behind this is that a whole expedition is not launched at one time, half launched as the second part of the previous expedition, hand over and couple weeks later second part of new expedition launches. Once again I don't know how to change the info box coding. If it is as simple as just typing expedition start and expedition end then I can do that, otherwise an expert such as yourself better do it so it does not get all messed up. Thanks --<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 00:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Japanese spacecraft
most, if not all, Japanese spacecraft have two names. often the ceremonial name is so very common that disambiguation is required. in those cases only makes sense to use both, as does jaxa. cheers! --emerson7 16:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that most Japanese spacecraft have two names, and that disambiguation is usually required, I just think it would be a good idea to hold a discussion as to whether that would be best achieved by using the other name, or by using a standard disambiguator. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 16:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * jaxa generally uses both....i don't really see the point in using a arbitrary standard disambiguator if it's already provided. --emerson7 16:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * btw...i accidentally deleted Okina and Ouna....thanks for catching that. cheers! --emerson7 17:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * has reverted your move of SELENE. I think you should see that as an indication that these moves should not be made unilaterally since they are clearly not uncontroversial. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 09:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

ITN for STS-132
-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   21:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:TLS-A
Template:TLS-A has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No objection here, feel free to tag it as G7. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 18:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Also, I have been populating Category:Space articles needing infoboxes -MBK004 02:02, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done, and I've replied there. I'll try and de-populate the infoboxes category if I need a break from creating navboxes and moving badly capitalised articles. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * How did you think I was finding articles to populate the category, I'm going through the AWB runs you were doing to add the navboxes. Also, we should probably update WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight/Timeline Status in regards to the recent splits. I'm probably going to get started on converting the remaining years to the new format over the next couple of days. In that vein of thought, there are some template problems on 1960 in spaceflight (July–December) at the bottom. -MBK004 01:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to take a break from these templates and get on with the lower end of the timeline. I've updated the status and fixed 1960. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:LSY-0
Template:LSY-0 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 22:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * They all qualify for speedy deletion under G7, so if you want to close now that might save some time. Feel free to get rid of and  whilst you're at it. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks for the prompt response.  Best regards. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk)  22:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. These have been cluttering up the template space for some time. If I recall correctly, the LSY ones were retired in 2006, and their replacements have since been replaced. is the only one we still need. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

GPS IIF SV-1
Thanks for your work GPS 2F (and correcting my edit on the launch date). I see there is a red link for 2F series. In nosing around your contributions I see that 2F sort of redirects to GPS satellite. I have a fair amount to add to this series but don't know where to put it. Should I put in the red link article you have on SV-1 or the appropriate section in the GPS Satellite article? The satellite article naming structure is kind of intimidating. Thanks!Americasroof (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If it is about the Block IIF in general, I would suggest putting it in GPS Block IIF, with a brief summary in the main GPS satellite article. I have created a stub for Block IIF to help with structure, I hope you find it useful to expand upon. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! That's quite a "stub" ;-)  My focus will be basically on its GPS capabilities.  Thanks again! (T Minus 5 minutes at this writing). Americasroof (talk) 02:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
-MBK004 22:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sorting that out. I have replied there. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 23:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Np, a relatively straight-forward page move with a deletion and page restoration, didn't take more than one minute. We'll continue the admin discussion on my talk page. -MBK004 00:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Spacewalks
It links to a Talk: reference which doesn't exist (there is no explanation of any such problem on the Talk page) and the problem is absurdly amorphous: it says nothing about which references, in particular, have contradictions and what the nature of the contradiction is. You can't just drop a warning like that in and expect editors to search every square inch of the article looking for 'contradictions'. If you've found something problematic, specify what it is in the Talk page; otherwise nothing will be done and the warning is useless. RandomCritic (talk) 20:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It seemed more obvious when I added it, I'll make a more detailed assessment, and then I'll restore the template once I have listed details on the talk page. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 20:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Query re TOC positioning
Your feedback is welcome at Talk:2010 in spaceflight -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, and have replied there. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 17:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Some help deciphering/referencing what an IP put into 2010 in spaceflight would be appreciated. I have hidden it from view for now. -MBK004 06:02, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, apogee was too low anyway so I removed it. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN for STSAT-2B
-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You presume too much
Do you actually believe that most people think that "MDA" stands for what you intended? How many people have even heard of your MDA? Keep this in mind in the future: It's customary to first give the written out form, e.g., Department of Justice, or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, before writing "DOJ" or "EEOC" in an article. 98.71.254.205 (talk) 19:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And which article(s) are you referring to? Besides, I always link first usage, so it should be fairly easy to work it out. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 01:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry about not including a link--stupid oversight on my part. Anyway, in both your original version and your most recent version, while you do indeed include a link, you use "MDA" in the opening sentence without explaining what "MDA" is, and indeed, you never explain what MDA is, anywhere in the article.  Sure you include a link, but that's not enough--the reader should not have to click on or even hover over a link to find out what MDA stands for.98.71.254.205 (talk) 01:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

US SLBM test
There was some launches of UGM-133 Trident II missiles from USS Maryland (SSBN-738) on 8 and 9 June. Two missiles on each day:. I'm not sure if these reached space to qualify for listing at 2010 in spaceflight. -MBK004 02:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Typical Trident launches reach around 1,000 km. They'll qualify. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

ITN for Soyuz TMA-19
-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Template edit warring
FYI: this guy is relentless -MBK004 04:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If he wants less redlinks, I'm happy to comply. I've created three Samos articles this morning, I've got a fourth on the way, and I'll do the rest later. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 11:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Ofeq 9 is Ofeq 8
Hi,

I have noticed the edit summary of your last edit on the "Shavit" article, where you wrote that the number choosing smethod was changed and the Ofeq 9 is actually Ofeq 8. I heared about it myself, it's said that in the IAI some decided to avoid even numbers because of previous faliure, however-do you have the source? (Just out of ceariousity, it's not needed for the article). Regards--Gilisa (talk) 10:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * My source for the change of system is this, which states that the Ofek-8 designation has been reassigned to TecSAR. I have heard the other rumours, but I do not have a reliable source for them yet. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 12:53, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, the Shavit-1 first failure was with Ofeq-3, an odd number, and anyway failures were mainly due the direction of the launch and never happened with Shavit 2 (although it contemned with even number), so it must all be a canard. In the main stream Israeli media an article was published about one or two years ago, written by one of Israel's top military journalists (i.e., have very good sources in the military establishment) and he briefly wrote that in one of the launches Israel positioned in space 3 different devices whose purpose remained classified. So, who knows (although it's a bit strange to tell you intend to send Ofeq 8 to space but then to keep it in secrete just after you did it). Also, after ofeq 9 was launched yesterday, the head of the Israeli space agency told that Israel now has 10 active satellites in space. It's a bit strange if you count only what was published, in this case you get to lower number. Apologize for the spelling.--Gilisa (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 10 makes more sense if you count Eros and Amos. Don't quite understand the bit about ducks, but other than that it makes sense. The first failure was an unnumbered satellite between 2 and 3, if I recall correctly. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 23:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You recalled correctly..Thanks--Gilisa (talk) 06:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Black Project report
As a member of the Black Project working group I wanted to leave this message here to inform you that the most recent black project report has been completed and is now available for reading at this link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TomStar81 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 23 June 2010
 * Thanks. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 18:53, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Juno I - please clarify
Can you clarify what you mean in Juno I when you said that "no other nation has used this method"? Someone flagged it last month and I don't understand the sentence either. Thank you. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 04:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't remember adding that. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It is in this edit you made diff] but your edit comment is that it was split off from the Jupiter C article, so it must have come from there. Does the sentence make sense to you?  If not, I think it should be deleted.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 14:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It was added to the Jupiter C article Oct. 5, 2004 by an anon editor, who added two or three paragraphs. The only sense I get out of the sentence is that it is commenting on the Redstone being used for the first stage of the Juno 1 but the Jupiter IRBM being used for the first stage of the Juno 2.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 14:47, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No idea. I've removed it. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 17:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you are right in tagging the other sentence about "inferior". The only thing I can think of there is that the upper stages of the Juno I were not guided.  I assume that the other rockets were, but I'm not sure.  Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 21:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, Explorer 1 was a lot lighter than Sputnik, so that may be it. Bubba73 (You talkin' to me?), 20:10, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The IP is correct
I think you may have seen this. The IP is correct, with the news out of NASA we do need to undertake a massive edit to the schedule, both 2010 and 2011. I'll be rather busy for the weekend due to the holiday here in the states. Cheers, -MBK004 21:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for dealing with the images. I've moved the two missions to their new launch dates as well as pulling HTV-2 out of the Dump and putting it in 2011 on its new launch date, but I can't update this whole thing myself. When you get a chance I could use some assistance... -MBK004 21:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, Falcon 9 Flight 2 just popped up in my watchlist, but I'm not sure if this article is necessary re notability... -MBK004 18:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...
Have to head to a meeting, will reply tonight, but I do see you've left a second message, thanks for the TB. --<font color='#66dd44'>j &#9883; e deckertalk 21:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hope your meeting goes well, I look forward to reading your reply. Thanks. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 21:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Back, replied. Cheers!  :)  --<font color='#66dd44'>j &#9883; e deckertalk 02:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Astromag Free-Flyer
Hi

I thought I had accidentally deleted the notice for deletion - started to panic then saw your summary :¬)

It's an interesting topic as it was the "almost made it" part of experiments all of which led to BESS and the ARCADE NCT expreiments (and I suppose to the one where the balloon went racing across the desert and smashed that poor guys SUV up ) and the eventual AMS which will (hopefully) be on the last shuttle mission.

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 13:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing that article up. When I found it this morning it contained virtually no information, and most of what it did contain was inaccurate. The only suggestion I would make is since you've added so much information about the rest of the Astromag programme, perhaps Astromag would be a more appropriate title. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You know, that is exactly what I was just thinking lol. I was debating (internally) whether I should just do that or also think about creating an article for the others, mainly NCT which seems to have nothing about it at all. Chaosdruid (talk) 15:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest moving it, and then creating others as needed. A separate article for the freeflyer could always be created later if enough information becomes available. I couldn't find anything except the (spurious) NSSDC page when I looked earlier. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:22, 21 July 2010(UTC)


 * A lot of info is buried in the old Goddard "newspaper" which doesnt really come out in a Google (or similar) search. The experiment was superceeded by the AMS I think, though just to be sure I emailed NASA !
 * I have created the NCT page - will move to ASTROMAG once I have got all the info out of the Flyer page in a few mins :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 15:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest using lowercase for the title per WP:MOSTM. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I was just typing that as it was easier than it's official title "Particle Astrophysics Magnet Facility" lol - I do not really like using anacronyms in titles of the main work although I will prob do a redir from the anacronym as most will not use the official title Chaosdruid (talk) 15:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. All done :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I would suggest capitalising the first letter of each word (ie. Particle Astrophysics Magnet Facility not particle astrophysics magnet facility. Other than that, great work. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Bugger - I put it as "Particle astrophysics magnet facility" although I suppose that is not a problem as the search engine will find it easily ? Chaosdruid (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC) PS - wow, thanks for the BStar !

I've fixed the title. You deserved the star for the amount of work you've done to improve the article. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 16:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * and I've fixed the redir pages - thanks for your help on all that. I really like it when people can actually get really basic articles up to scratch and it's a rewarding feeling to see that C class and bstar after it was up for deletion :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Apollo 6
Other than you and one other editor on Wikipedia, I don't see that any of the standard Apollo history sources calling Apollo 6 a launch failure. I am in favor of clarity and simplicity, which includes defining and and explaining the terms used, and then using the terms in accordance to the way they have been defined. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 19:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not calling it a failure, I'm calling it a partial failure. Due to the stupid format of those articles, anything other than 100% success is considered a failure. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 19:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

CryoSat-2 at DYK
Hi there! Great work on the CryoSat-2 article. I've just taken a look at it for DYK and have made a couple of brief comments about the hook. Nothing major but your view and input would be appreciated so that I can verify it. Thanks. Nick Ottery (talk) 14:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied at Template talk:Did you know --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 14:52, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look at that. I think the hook is good for DYK now and have said so over there. Thanks. Nick Ottery (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Compass-2
(sdsds - talk) 23:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI
Not sure if you've seen this, but the USA-193 shootdown has just gotten quite a bit more written about it on wikipedia: Operation Burnt Frost. USA-193 may need to be revamped or modified to incorporate any new information. -MBK004 10:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll look into that later. Thanks --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK for CryoSat-2
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

New rockets?
When you get a chance, might you take a look at these two new articles created by a brand-new user: Falcon X and Falcon XX. I'm not sure if these are notable enough for articles yet... -MBK004 20:44, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I know these are just early proposals, but we do have quite a few articles for such proposals - most of the Saturns, Direct, Ares IV, SDHLV, etc. If enough information can be found, and reliable third-party sources can be provided, I have no objections to keeping them, however at the moment Falcon X is littered with citation needed tags, and Falcon XX is a short stub. --<font color="#496636">G <font color="#115566">W <font color="#551166">/P … 08:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That is what I thought, but with these two, I don't think we'll find much that was not published by SpaceX itself unless this gains some traction...
 * On the issue of the comparison of launchers issue you've been dealing with for a while, this guy seems to want to do away with the tally all together.
 * I've also recently gone through the TLS for 2010-2012 and done a major update, but I might have missed a few dates/launches so I would appreciate it if you would do a once over. -MBK004 01:45, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay
 * Obviously if no further sources can be found, the articles should be deleted, or preferably merged into SpaceX
 * N2e raised a concern a couple of weeks ago over the referencing of that column so I would guess that he is just acting on that concern. He supported my proposal to replace the column with a count of launches.
 * Thanks for doing that, I had been meaning to do so for some time, but never got around to it. I'll go through and check later.
 * Thanks --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You may want to pay specific attention to the upcoming Chinese launches, I tend to stay away from attempting to update those since the information is not all that forthcoming. -MBK004 21:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
You may be able to lend a hand or even code a template or two for this... -MBK004 12:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

AEHF
When you write the article on AEHF-1, would you also mind going through Milstar and Advanced Extremely High Frequency? An IP recently had an edit spree on those two and I'm not sure if the best course of action is a complete revert or what. Thanks, -MBK004 18:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've done USA-214, and started on Milstar, I'll do the rest later. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 20:23, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I suspect the IP who did this is the same person that you blocked this morning (on a different IP) for MOS violations. He seems to have switched addresses whilst the original one was blocked. I've just reverted similar edits which messed up Korabl-Sputnik 2 and Sputnik program (the latter of which is quite an achievement as it was already one of the worst articles I have ever seen. I think he is acting in good faith, but since he is unwilling to discuss the changes that have been contested, action is justified. If my suspicions are correct, he may try and evade your block too, so you might want to keep an eye out for similar edits. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 09:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it has now become clear that this person is not here to work constructively with others judging from his behavior post-block; attacking me instead of addressing the issue in a calm manner. If he starts up when I'm not around, this will need to be taken to WP:ANI immediately since it is not clear-cut vandalism but is still disruptive editing and if he persists after the block expires then I would see no tangible benefit to keeping him around. -MBK004

Ks/x
Hello! You are welcome to take a part in the discussion that concerns the transliteration of 'кс' here. Unfortunately, there is no consensus regarding this matter and the transliteration varies from article to article. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 12:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest that we continue our discussion of the Экспресс-specific case on the article's talk page. Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 16:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 16:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Naro-1 in 2010 in spaceflight
2010 in spaceflight Could you explain your reasoining why you have the Russian flag listed first for the Naro-1? --Aflafla1 (talk) 23:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
IP on the war path it looks like. Perhaps you'd like to handle this one? -MBK004 21:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * He's talking out of his backside. And he went on to make this edit to Naro-1, which I think just about sums him up. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Did you see this? He just reverted back to his version again. -MBK004 22:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to respond right now, because if I did it would probably violate NPA. If you think his edit is vandalism feel free to revert. Either way, I would appreciate your input on this issue. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I think came close to violating WP:BRD with the revert. Though he definitely should not have reverted, I recommend just discussion at this point because another revert will initiate a full-scale edit war. That being said, you are within your rights to revert per the same policy and insist on a thorough discussion which it appears he has not provided to support his position as of yet. I believe that the policy is on your side, but don't quote me on that. -MBK004 22:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Oko
In regards to this, have you seen anything substantial (other than Anik)? -MBK004 04:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I have, but I can't remember where, and I can't find it again. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

European Space Directory
Do you happen to have the European Space Directory publication, or know someone who does? It would probably be very useful for several things, such as prices for different launchers. Offliner (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, no. If you ever see a copy going for less than £20 on Amazon or ebay, please let me know. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 17:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Skylon
I am in need of help in improving the above article to a higher level. Nearly all the pictures in it do not qualify for fair use (which is unfortunate considering that they are very good) so I have requested their deletion. If you have information in regards to the parent company Reaction Engines Limited or fair use photos that would be most useful. If you haven't done this already please join SPACEFLIGHT to combine your efforts with like minded editors.-- Gniniv (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There are four images. Two of them are used under claims of fair use, the other two are images which I created and made available under free licences, so fair use is not applicable. I cannot see any grounds to defend the fair use rationale for the two images for which it is claimed - they are high resolution, replaceable, and not necessary to illustrate the subject. Photos are not available because none have been built, and I do not know too much about REL. I am a member of WP:SPACEFLIGHT, number 30 on the list. I also noticed that you attempted to use one of the fair use images outside of the article namespace (Portal:Spaceflight/Selected picture/September 2010), which is an explicit violation of policy regarding such images. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My usage of that image was what made me aware of the fair use problem. Thank you for helping me clear them off the roster and for removing the image I placed on that portal.-- Gniniv (talk) 10:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Common Booster Core
Hello, you changed redirection from article Common Core Booster to Delta IV. Please, take a look at first article - it is not about rocket, but about unified rocket module. Therefore, redirection to Common Core Booster looks more properly, to my mind. I returned it back.--Beaber (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * CCB is the correct name for the first stage of the Atlas V. CBC is the correct name for the first stage of the Delta IV. The two are not related. The current CCB article is misnamed, since it is a general article using a specific name (the approximate equivalent of using the name "dog" for the article "mammal"). --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 23:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My impression that it's just some principle to combine rocket into various versions. It has various names, no more. This redirection rises some misunderstanding. Perhaps it would be better to have separated article on this type of unified module used for Delta IV. And another idea that besides general principle of such universal modules we didn't see their use for another systems yet, only for Delta IV HLV. Consequently, it may be more properly to use name Common Booster Core for all kinds of unified modules, which will appear later. That is, it would be better to rename former target article (Common Core Booster -> Common Booster Core)? --Beaber (talk) 00:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with your first and second points, but not your third. Moving Common Core Booster to Common Booster Core would merely relocate the problem as the issues the redirect currently cause for Delta would apply equally to Atlas if it were the other way around. Splitting seems to be the best way forward; I was already working on a CBC article anyway, and after that I'll write one for the CCB. The current CCB article can be expanded to cover modular rocket design, and moved to a more appropriate name for that subject. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 07:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK.--Beaber (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 21:22, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Reorganisation and Improvement
Hi, I noticed you seem to be one of the more active members of the space-related WikiProjects so I was just wondering if you could take a look at some thoughts I've put down about improving collaboration on them.

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Space

Any comments would be appreciated, thanks. ChiZeroOne (talk) 21:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies  talk 19:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Dashbot and templates
I noticed you put "[no]bots|deny=dashbot" in a number of templates back in May. I had a quick look for a discussion but couldn't find one. Nobots/bots is intended (in project space) to be a temporary way of keeping content safe and keeping bots running. In this case I can see that there were a number of redirects that were intended to become articles in due course - DashBot should respect these - because they should be labelled R with possibilities or one of its synonyms - I can't speak for DashBot and say that it does, but it would be a fairly simple fix if not. The redirects are listed here: User:Rich_Farmbrough/temp88 are they all "with possibilities"? Rich Farmbrough, 22:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC).
 * A little EUI here, but as far as I know, many of those redirects were not tagged with anything. I think it my have been a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, but all of the redirs on those templates should have been tagged as having possibilities. They were certainly all intended for creation. I don't think there was a discussion for all of those specific instances, but I took the de facto position indicated by previous discussions on similar issues. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 00:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK I tagged them all, although PMA-1 and PMA-2 might be a little over the top.
 * Thanks. Agree that the PMAs could be a step too far, but I'll have a look at their construction histories and see. Either way, they're certainly nowhere near the top of my list of articles to create. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 06:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Stand-alone banner template
I see that the Unmanned spaceflight banner has been removed but there has been no reply to the related talk page message, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spaceflight. Sorry but I think Human Spaceflight and Unmanned spaceflight are crippled by restricting them to the Space template because their direct parent's scope already includes theirs in entirety. What is the point in tagging a project with a Space tag and both USF and SF?. If you tag something as Unmanned spaceflight really you should also check Spaceflight, in every single instance. As I have said elsewhere all the Space projects and their scopes, as they are currently, make no structural sense. If someone wants to develop articles on USF, as the parent project both includes all of it's scope and has more members, people are always going to use SF instead. USF is a poor relation stuck in a granny-annex, it can never recruit or hold on to members the way things are.

And for that matter why have other stand-alone banner templates like WikiProject Solar System's not been removed? Can we not figure out a better way to structure Space-related projects? ChiZeroOne (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Advanced Gemini
The article Advanced Gemini 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:Advanced Gemini for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:30, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

CyroSat-2 GAN on hold
I hope you are well. I have reviewed the article and left it on hold, which can be seen on the review page. I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for the issues to be addressed, and more time can be given if needed. If you have any questions or when you finish addressing the issues, please let me know on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:10, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Expedition 1
Hi, thanks for reviewing Expedition 1. I think I've addressed your concerns; let me know if there's anything I've missed, or anything further you'd like. Sorry for the delay. :) Mlm42 (talk) 07:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

SAC Missiles
Hi GW. Coming here I looked at your userpage - I really like that list of upcoming launches! Right, SAC missiles - yes, after re-reviewing the criteria it seems I was wrong. I've restored the page, and made it a redirect to the more comprehensive listing of missiles on the main SAC page. Regards from Aotearoa, Buckshot06 (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion for CryoSat-2
An article that you have been involved in editing, CryoSat-2, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 11:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Human spaceflight/Status
Hi GW, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at the coding for the status template you made for us for Portal:Human spaceflight, please? Mlm42 has been making some major edits there and it doesn't work any more. Thanks, Colds7ream (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I can partially answer this question (hopefully it's not rude to respond on someone else's talk page..). I've reworked the page using Random Portal Components, so it randomly displays the different components. For example, you can always add more Selected articles to Portal:Human spaceflight/Selected article, but it isn't necessary. In other words, I don't think there is a need for that status template on the Human spaceflight portal anymore. Mlm42 (talk) 17:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll look into this when I have more free time. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Salyut expeditions
Hello, I've suggested names for the Salyut expedition articles here, you may have an opinion? thanks, Mlm42 (talk) 16:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Retirement

 * Following discussions with MBK004 and Colds7ream, and since the edits which concerned me have been reverted and all users involved have agreed to discuss the issue before taking any action, I have agreed to reconsider my retirement. I have reserved the right to retire at a later date should the outcome of ongoing discussion result in an impedance to my regular style of editing. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

For what its worth
...the same thing happened to me back in 2005 with the fictional articles I had labored so hard to create and improve, so I can relate the the notability crap your experiencing. Wherever life takes you from here on out, stay safe, and know that there will be a place here for you if and when you decide to return. Sincerely, TomStar81 (Talk) 08:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The community's poor understanding of article deletion is definitely one of the major flaws with Wikipedia today. Created content should never be made inaccessible unless there is a legal requirement that it be made so (e.g. copyright violation). GW Simulations: thanks for all your past work.  Know that it is appreciated! (sdsds - talk) 22:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 08:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Great to have you back! :-) Colds7ream (talk) 13:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Glad your back. We need more people like you.--<font color="Red" face="Segoe Print">Navy <font color="#4169E1" face="Georgia">Blue84 00:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Spaceflight portals
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. 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 08:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC).

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject activity
Hello there! As part of an experiment 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 Unmanned 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 Unmanned spaceflight at 17:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC).

WikiProject Human spaceflight activity
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 19:07, 17 November 2010 (UTC).

WikiProject Timeline of Spaceflight activity
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).

Launchers
So, we have to create a line for the current Ariane 5, don't we?Nezdek (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It already has one. Due to its greater payload capacity, it is in the next list in the series. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok Ok Sorry. But I come from the fr.wiki and the link of the list of all the rocket launchers is only a specific case and I've not seen that. Sorry again. This link is not quite good... Bye Nezdek (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:13, 21 November 2010 (UTC).
 * Nothing to be sorry about, personally I think it is a stupid system and you're not the first person that it's caught out. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 10:19, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Point Arguello Launch Complex A
Please reply at Talk:Point Arguello Launch Complex A. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Space reorganization
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 00:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC).

Space reorganization
Hi, GW. To get more comments, it might be a good idea to use the User:MessageDeliveryBot and message the 98 people on the Space members list; did you want to do that, or shall I? It seemed to work really well when Colds7ream did it regarding the Portal merge. Thanks for starting the RfC. Mlm42 (talk) 22:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I was concerned that might come across as canvassing, but if you think it would be a good idea, then go for it. I have a list of all of the members of all of the space projects if that would be better, see WikiProject Space/AllMembers. Thanks. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay; since the discussion is about the future of WikiProject Space, I think it's probably safe to simply message its members. I'm not so sure about messaging other WikiProjects, so I'll just start with Space.. a short message on the other space wikiprojects' talk pages is probably sufficient. Mlm42 (talk) 22:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, how did you make that raw members list? It was very useful for using the MessageDeliveryBot. Mlm42 (talk) 18:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I copied the raw text and wrote a program to process it. Unfortunately I didn't think to save the code. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProjects Moon and Mars activity
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).

WikiProject Spaceflight activity
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 17:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC).


 * I did this some time ago, how come the message has only arrived now? --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 19:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Error on my part, don't mind it. Colds7ream (talk) 22:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Closing the Discussion
Hey GW, looks like we've got consensus for option 2 - any thoughts as to the best person to close it? I can ask at the Admin Noticeboard? Colds7ream (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a very clear consensus, so I think it would be okay for you to close it. Once you've done that, please let me know and I'll start making the necessary changes. I would suggest leaving the other sections open. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:08, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Righto, I'll go ahead and close the RfC - here's to opening the floodgates on a huge amount of work! Colds7ream (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's closed - poyekhali! Colds7ream (talk) 15:27, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Can you also close the standard assessment discussion please. I've incorporated the extended scale into the new template --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 15:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Colds7ream (talk) 15:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

AWB replacement
Sure Let me know if you need help cleaning up these tags. As I understand it, the project is going to look through them anyway, so it's not a critical that I review my edits, but I could be wrong and I would completely understand it if you wanted my assistance. Just post to my talk. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I'll remove the notice that is appearing around the WPSpace banner inviting users to help retag the articles; it seems a little premature, since we haven't settled on task force organizations, we don't have good advice for how they should be tagged yet. Mlm42 (talk) 22:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Could I suggest that it be changed to one asking users to replace for Solar System and Astronomy (since their banners are already established). I didn't realise that you intended to reassess all of the articles at the same time. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 22:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Who's reassessing articles at the same time? I thought we could first decide how to reassess them (i.e. improve the importance rating guide), make sure the new banner works, and it well documented, and settle on a WikiProject structure! What's the rush in replacing the banners now as opposed to once these issues have been settled? Mlm42 (talk) 22:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly, you want to wait until there is an importance assessment process so that they can be assessed when the banners are changed. That's not an issue, but I'm concerned that the discussion will take a very long time. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 23:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * But regardless of assessments, the WikiProject structure is something that is relevant here.. because maybe the template's parameters will change.. maybe as soon as this week. That's not far off at all, and it might be worth waiting. Mlm42 (talk) 23:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Spaceflight reboot
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 00:09, 6 December 2010 (UTC).

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The Downlink: Issue 0

 * 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 16:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC).

Errors In Message Delivery
Hello, this is an automated message to inform you that some errors were encountered while processing your delivery request (The Downlink: Issue 0). Please deliver the messages to the following users manually, if you wish, because the bot was not allowed to do so:


 * Hurricane Devon - User is blocked.
 * Jmclark911 - User is blocked.
 * Writtenonsand - Connection error.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot at 16:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC).

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Spaceflight Talk page template
I just updated a (very) few articles with the new TP template. I would appreciate it if you would look over those few edits (see my Contribs page) and provide me feedback on how I did, and what I need to improve. Then, if you'll point me to a list, I'll be happy to help cleanup the backlog. N2e (talk) 17:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * They look pretty reasonable. Are you happy to do task forces as well? --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 18:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback. I don't understand your followup question.  N2e (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Some of the articles need to be tagged for the Human Spaceflight and Unmanned Spaceflight task forces as well, which is done by setting a parameter within the Spaceflight template. The parameters for Unmanned Spaceflight and some of the Human Spaceflight articles are the same in both the old and new templates, but some of the Human Spaceflight ones use a separate template, which also needs to be replaced with the new Spaceflight one. Are you happy to do those as well? --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 19:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I can probably take a few minutes to learn the parm syntax and do that too. For now, I'm spread a little too thin to commit to getting after that, and developing facility in that, until later on.  So I won't do too many of the template cleanups until I can do both.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 18:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

KH-13
Hi, now that KH-13 is a disambiguation page, we need your help with the cleanup (per WP:FIXDABLINKS). I've looked at the links, and it isn't very easy to guess which KH-13 was intended in a given article. This list helps find and fix dablinks (mostly two templates that need fixing); could you give us a hand? We really need expert help on this one. Thanks, --<font color="#990000">Ja <font color="#000099">Ga <font color="#000000" size="-1">talk 17:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think some of those were treating two of the uses as a single item. I've sorted out that list, and I'll have another look when it updates, as I'm sure there were more links to it than that. --<font color="#115566">G <font color="#496636">W … 17:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That was quick, thanks! Other users may have already fixed the ones they could figure out. That should be it. Much appreciated. --<font color="#990000">Ja <font color="#000099">Ga <font color="#000000" size="-1">talk 18:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)