This redirect was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This redirect was accepted on 15 February 2014 by reviewer
Dodger67 (
talk·contribs).
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Merger proposal
I propose that
Skyhook (structure) be merged into
Orbiting skyhook. The articles are duplicated to the extend that the text is a mirror image of each other. While merging, a major style overhaul and cleanup should be done, including:
I agree.
Skyhook (structure) was the earlier of the two but contained very little worthwhile material before recent additions. However the current versions of both articles are completely unacceptable as POV, OR and advocacy.
andy (
talk) 14:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply
d'accord
andy (
talk) 16:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Looks like
User:Skyhook1 wants to engage in discussions, except when he does not want to. He made a redirect Orbiting skyhook → Skyhook (structure). His
WP:Ownership of articles is a discussion I am not willing to entertain. The article will be pounded into shape today, or next year. Cheers,
BatteryIncluded (
talk) 19:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply
This redirect was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This redirect was accepted on 15 February 2014 by reviewer
Dodger67 (
talk·contribs).
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Merger proposal
I propose that
Skyhook (structure) be merged into
Orbiting skyhook. The articles are duplicated to the extend that the text is a mirror image of each other. While merging, a major style overhaul and cleanup should be done, including:
I agree.
Skyhook (structure) was the earlier of the two but contained very little worthwhile material before recent additions. However the current versions of both articles are completely unacceptable as POV, OR and advocacy.
andy (
talk) 14:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply
d'accord
andy (
talk) 16:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Looks like
User:Skyhook1 wants to engage in discussions, except when he does not want to. He made a redirect Orbiting skyhook → Skyhook (structure). His
WP:Ownership of articles is a discussion I am not willing to entertain. The article will be pounded into shape today, or next year. Cheers,
BatteryIncluded (
talk) 19:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)reply