![]() | This is the
talk page of a
redirect that has been
merged and now targets the page: • SpaceX Starship Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:SpaceX Starship Merged page edit history is maintained in order to preserve attributions. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
This sentence was recently added to the article by an IP editor:
Like the proposed name for the first ITS crew vehicle, "Heart of Gold", the number of engines, 42, is related to the novel Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. [1]
I have removed it per WP:BRD to discuss on the Talk page.
Musk undoubtedly referred to the name of the first Interplanetary Spaceship on a Mars route with reference to the idea from Hitch Hiker's Guide, and that information remains in the article, and is not undue.
But regarding the number of booster engines, while many have speculated that the number seems coincidentally related to the HHG key number of 42, and Musk likes HHG etc., we don't seem to have sources that indicate a fictional book from the past gave Musk and SpaceX engineers the number of engines for the first stage. Even the source provided, which mentions it, calls it a coincidence. Moreover, it would be WP:UNDUE to mention it so prominently in that way, very early in the section on the booster.
So let's discuss it here, and see if consensus might be found. N2e ( talk) 11:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
References
In this section an incorrect value of mass is listed as 10,500 kg (which is then converted to 23,100 lbs). The correct value is 10,500 British tons (a British ton is 2240 lbs). This means the value given in pounds of mass would be 10,500 x 2240 = 23,520,000 lbs.)
I do not know how to correctly edit this so I will leave it for someone familiar with the function calls used here on Wikipedia.
24.181.205.98 ( talk) 22:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on ITS launch vehicle. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:32, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
FYI, someone has proposed a merge between BFR (rocket) and ITS launch vehicle -- 70.51.46.15 ( talk) 07:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
The article infobox currently says:
Launch sites Kennedy LC-39A
............ South Texas (proposed)
Should we list launch sites in the Infobox for an LV that was merely an LC design, albeit a quite notable one? It seems to me like maybe not. Anyone else have a view on that? Cheers. N2e ( talk) 00:06, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Both the ITS launch vehicle and the three-legged carbon fiber BFR (rocket) are related PAST concepts of what evolved into the current four-fin metallic SpaceX Starship system. Context of their development is paramount, therefore, based on the discussion and iVotes in at Talk:BFR (rocket)#A simpler proposal, it is proposed to now implement the merge of BFR into the ITS launch vehicle under a new title: Starship development history.
The
ITS launch vehicle and the three-legged BFR carbon fiber vehicles are officially now part of the history of the
SpaceX Starship system (Starship + Super Heavy booster are collectively referred to by SpaceX as simply "Starship"
[1]) so Wikipedia readers are best served by merging the development history into a single page for best chronology and full context. This logical action will also address the unreasonable —and unsustainable— massive duplication between the
BFR (rocket) and
SpaceX Starship articles.
The discussion on this strategy and iVotes shown at the
BFR Talk page, show a very strong support for this single merge and page name, so lets make it happen. Cheers,
Rowan Forest (
talk)
14:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I have requested an uninvolved editor to close the discussion and determine consensus via the Requests for closure board. N2e ( talk) 21:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is the
talk page of a
redirect that has been
merged and now targets the page: • SpaceX Starship Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:SpaceX Starship Merged page edit history is maintained in order to preserve attributions. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
This sentence was recently added to the article by an IP editor:
Like the proposed name for the first ITS crew vehicle, "Heart of Gold", the number of engines, 42, is related to the novel Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. [1]
I have removed it per WP:BRD to discuss on the Talk page.
Musk undoubtedly referred to the name of the first Interplanetary Spaceship on a Mars route with reference to the idea from Hitch Hiker's Guide, and that information remains in the article, and is not undue.
But regarding the number of booster engines, while many have speculated that the number seems coincidentally related to the HHG key number of 42, and Musk likes HHG etc., we don't seem to have sources that indicate a fictional book from the past gave Musk and SpaceX engineers the number of engines for the first stage. Even the source provided, which mentions it, calls it a coincidence. Moreover, it would be WP:UNDUE to mention it so prominently in that way, very early in the section on the booster.
So let's discuss it here, and see if consensus might be found. N2e ( talk) 11:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
References
In this section an incorrect value of mass is listed as 10,500 kg (which is then converted to 23,100 lbs). The correct value is 10,500 British tons (a British ton is 2240 lbs). This means the value given in pounds of mass would be 10,500 x 2240 = 23,520,000 lbs.)
I do not know how to correctly edit this so I will leave it for someone familiar with the function calls used here on Wikipedia.
24.181.205.98 ( talk) 22:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on ITS launch vehicle. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:32, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
FYI, someone has proposed a merge between BFR (rocket) and ITS launch vehicle -- 70.51.46.15 ( talk) 07:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
The article infobox currently says:
Launch sites Kennedy LC-39A
............ South Texas (proposed)
Should we list launch sites in the Infobox for an LV that was merely an LC design, albeit a quite notable one? It seems to me like maybe not. Anyone else have a view on that? Cheers. N2e ( talk) 00:06, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Both the ITS launch vehicle and the three-legged carbon fiber BFR (rocket) are related PAST concepts of what evolved into the current four-fin metallic SpaceX Starship system. Context of their development is paramount, therefore, based on the discussion and iVotes in at Talk:BFR (rocket)#A simpler proposal, it is proposed to now implement the merge of BFR into the ITS launch vehicle under a new title: Starship development history.
The
ITS launch vehicle and the three-legged BFR carbon fiber vehicles are officially now part of the history of the
SpaceX Starship system (Starship + Super Heavy booster are collectively referred to by SpaceX as simply "Starship"
[1]) so Wikipedia readers are best served by merging the development history into a single page for best chronology and full context. This logical action will also address the unreasonable —and unsustainable— massive duplication between the
BFR (rocket) and
SpaceX Starship articles.
The discussion on this strategy and iVotes shown at the
BFR Talk page, show a very strong support for this single merge and page name, so lets make it happen. Cheers,
Rowan Forest (
talk)
14:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
I have requested an uninvolved editor to close the discussion and determine consensus via the Requests for closure board. N2e ( talk) 21:18, 13 October 2019 (UTC)