This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A news item involving Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 April 2012. |
Reference http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_03_20/68975741/ says that both the launch ($850 million) and the other celebrations ($2,000 million) marking 100 years since the birth of the country's late founder will cost 4.75 million tonnes of rice and not just the launch itself. But considering that North Korean Won cannot be spent outside North Korea, they really could not buy that much rice if they forwent the above events. Did they shift people from food production to work for the launch and the celebrations? And if so, by how much did food production drop? Did they purchase components for the rocket and other items for the celebrations from other countries? If so, the foreign exchange used could have been used for staples purchases. This is the analysis one has to make to determine how many tonnes of rice all these will cost. With this reasoning, I removed the "Cost" section from the article as it is inaccurate. Q43 ( talk) 12:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Since this page is likely going to get potentially vandalized due to the launch occurring, I think that the page should be somewhat locked down if possible. -- 204.106.251.214 ( talk) 00:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-korea-launches-rocket-amid-global-concerns-report/story-e6frfkyi-1226325496084 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.82.136 ( talk) 00:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
isn't the important part, the launch, and the launch vehicle, and not the satellite? The satellite is rarely mentioned, and it is the launch vehicle that has the most international impact, and technological impact. 70.24.248.211 ( talk) 14:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone (preferably the original writer) edit this sentence please: "On 21 March by the North Korean Embassy to Russia but Roscosmos's spokeman said Russia refused to dispatch its experts to the launch because it violated the UN Security Council resolution." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.17.57 ( talk) 17:38, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Also, a LOT of the English on this page needs correcting, including many items in the "International Response to the Announcement" section. I'm surprised that such a prominent page has not been properly edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.17.57 ( talk) 17:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian ( talk) 13:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 → Unha-3 – most of this article talks about the impact of the launch and launch vehicle, not the satellite, therefore, this is an article on the rocket, with the satellite forming a minor part of the content of this article. 70.24.248.211 ( talk) 06:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.Do we really need separate sections of the international reactions to the launch annoucement and international reactions to the launch failure? Can't they be combined at this point? Mztourist ( talk) 09:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm struck that there is a complete absence of media attention to the possible view of the DPRK's 'civilian', i.e. non military rocket launches as a purely political race with the South for historical access to space. They've put up a satellite just ahead of the ROK and propaganda is served. Decades down the road will history still view it as purely a military rocket program in guise? It's dual use is obvious as the cold war space race, but why does no one seem to take that angle into consideration for their motivation? Doyna Yar ( talk) 04:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3. 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) 19:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A news item involving Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 April 2012. |
Reference http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_03_20/68975741/ says that both the launch ($850 million) and the other celebrations ($2,000 million) marking 100 years since the birth of the country's late founder will cost 4.75 million tonnes of rice and not just the launch itself. But considering that North Korean Won cannot be spent outside North Korea, they really could not buy that much rice if they forwent the above events. Did they shift people from food production to work for the launch and the celebrations? And if so, by how much did food production drop? Did they purchase components for the rocket and other items for the celebrations from other countries? If so, the foreign exchange used could have been used for staples purchases. This is the analysis one has to make to determine how many tonnes of rice all these will cost. With this reasoning, I removed the "Cost" section from the article as it is inaccurate. Q43 ( talk) 12:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Since this page is likely going to get potentially vandalized due to the launch occurring, I think that the page should be somewhat locked down if possible. -- 204.106.251.214 ( talk) 00:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-korea-launches-rocket-amid-global-concerns-report/story-e6frfkyi-1226325496084 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.82.136 ( talk) 00:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
isn't the important part, the launch, and the launch vehicle, and not the satellite? The satellite is rarely mentioned, and it is the launch vehicle that has the most international impact, and technological impact. 70.24.248.211 ( talk) 14:16, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone (preferably the original writer) edit this sentence please: "On 21 March by the North Korean Embassy to Russia but Roscosmos's spokeman said Russia refused to dispatch its experts to the launch because it violated the UN Security Council resolution." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.17.57 ( talk) 17:38, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Also, a LOT of the English on this page needs correcting, including many items in the "International Response to the Announcement" section. I'm surprised that such a prominent page has not been properly edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.17.57 ( talk) 17:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian ( talk) 13:29, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 → Unha-3 – most of this article talks about the impact of the launch and launch vehicle, not the satellite, therefore, this is an article on the rocket, with the satellite forming a minor part of the content of this article. 70.24.248.211 ( talk) 06:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.Do we really need separate sections of the international reactions to the launch annoucement and international reactions to the launch failure? Can't they be combined at this point? Mztourist ( talk) 09:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm struck that there is a complete absence of media attention to the possible view of the DPRK's 'civilian', i.e. non military rocket launches as a purely political race with the South for historical access to space. They've put up a satellite just ahead of the ROK and propaganda is served. Decades down the road will history still view it as purely a military rocket program in guise? It's dual use is obvious as the cold war space race, but why does no one seem to take that angle into consideration for their motivation? Doyna Yar ( talk) 04:39, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3. 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) 19:22, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)