This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Spaceport template. |
|
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Wow, there are a lot of spaceports! I've taken a few steps to make the template a bit smaller by eliminating some of the whitespace. Does it still look OK? Sdsds 00:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It sure seems strange to me, but apparently French Guiana is a part of France, not a seperate country. Should this template be changed to reflect that oddity? Sdsds 09:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Reading all of these articles in that line, every spaceport in that line is actually operated by a state or local government authority. Should this be changed to reflect that fact? -- AEMoreira042281 23:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. ( sdsds - talk) 21:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I propose to edit this template to shorten the names from e.g. "Baikonur Cosmodrome" to "Baikonur" and from "Kennedy Space Center" to "Kennedy", etc. There are two motivations for this:
Before making the edit, maybe we should take a straw poll to get some sense of whether this change to the template would be at all controversial. ( sdsds - talk) 20:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I propose altering this template to list only "active spaceports", which would be defined by something easily verifiable like, "A space launch has been conducted from the site within the last three years." Otherwise, we would need to add e.g. Hammaguir, since it was from there that France conducted its first satellite launch. Does a "three years" criterion sound about right? ( sdsds - talk) 23:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
This template would be better if it included an image that was highly representational of spaceports, both as they exist now and as they will (soon?) exist in the future. I tried to find one that showed multiple launch vehicles, to hint at there being lots of launch activity. Maybe there's a better image, e.g. of "Missile Row" with multiple rockets at their pads? Or something else entirely? ( sdsds - talk) 05:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I suggest to delete Fort Churchill as a spaceport, as not one of its rockets ever reached space; all launches were sub-orbital. -- BatteryIncluded ( talk) 02:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The Greater Green River Intergalactic Spaceport does not belong in this template, as it was titled a "spaceport" for essentially marketing purposes. No spacecraft have taken off or landed at the site, nor is it licensed as a spaceport by the FAA.-- TDogg310 ( talk) 17:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Any reason not to include Woomera, South Australia? Goustien ( talk) 17:49, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Following my reverts of Sgsg today, I opened a discussion at Talk:Hainan Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Site. Editors, please contribute there. — JFG talk 21:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Should Poker Flat Research Range be added? It is an active range, with rockets reaching 1500 km apogees. D ralwi k| Have a Chat 20:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Spaceport template. |
|
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Wow, there are a lot of spaceports! I've taken a few steps to make the template a bit smaller by eliminating some of the whitespace. Does it still look OK? Sdsds 00:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It sure seems strange to me, but apparently French Guiana is a part of France, not a seperate country. Should this template be changed to reflect that oddity? Sdsds 09:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Reading all of these articles in that line, every spaceport in that line is actually operated by a state or local government authority. Should this be changed to reflect that fact? -- AEMoreira042281 23:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. ( sdsds - talk) 21:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I propose to edit this template to shorten the names from e.g. "Baikonur Cosmodrome" to "Baikonur" and from "Kennedy Space Center" to "Kennedy", etc. There are two motivations for this:
Before making the edit, maybe we should take a straw poll to get some sense of whether this change to the template would be at all controversial. ( sdsds - talk) 20:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I propose altering this template to list only "active spaceports", which would be defined by something easily verifiable like, "A space launch has been conducted from the site within the last three years." Otherwise, we would need to add e.g. Hammaguir, since it was from there that France conducted its first satellite launch. Does a "three years" criterion sound about right? ( sdsds - talk) 23:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
This template would be better if it included an image that was highly representational of spaceports, both as they exist now and as they will (soon?) exist in the future. I tried to find one that showed multiple launch vehicles, to hint at there being lots of launch activity. Maybe there's a better image, e.g. of "Missile Row" with multiple rockets at their pads? Or something else entirely? ( sdsds - talk) 05:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I suggest to delete Fort Churchill as a spaceport, as not one of its rockets ever reached space; all launches were sub-orbital. -- BatteryIncluded ( talk) 02:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The Greater Green River Intergalactic Spaceport does not belong in this template, as it was titled a "spaceport" for essentially marketing purposes. No spacecraft have taken off or landed at the site, nor is it licensed as a spaceport by the FAA.-- TDogg310 ( talk) 17:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Any reason not to include Woomera, South Australia? Goustien ( talk) 17:49, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Following my reverts of Sgsg today, I opened a discussion at Talk:Hainan Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Site. Editors, please contribute there. — JFG talk 21:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Should Poker Flat Research Range be added? It is an active range, with rockets reaching 1500 km apogees. D ralwi k| Have a Chat 20:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)