Talk:BFR (rocket)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the BFR (rocket) redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Copyright notice

I guess this needs copyright boxes, it contains large copies of text from other articles. One big source (but not the only one) can be found here: ITS launch vehicle. --mfb (talk) 06:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 16:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussions

Just to keep an overview:

Talk:BFR (rocket) - after the original article was moved away: This article was a draft for the merged history article.
Talk:ITS launch vehicle - formal merger proposal was there
Talk:SpaceX Starship - no extra discussion there
Talk:Starship development history - this article got the history and talk page from the old "BFR (rocket)" article. Most discussions are there.

--mfb (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Super Heavy (rocket)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Super Heavy (rocket). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 16:39, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge history

Soumya-8974, mfb, Rowan Forest. We really should be using one of the other two articles for the page history shouldn't we? Rather than a fresh article. ITS was older, but BFR has a much more extensive history and is on far more watchlists (the ITS title has 74 watchers, BFR (rocket) has 160 and this page has 'fewer than 30'). Due to this I'm going to suggest that we pageswap this title with the [[[BFR (rocket)]] redirect and then swap the page contents (I am a Page Mover and can do it if you guys agree). We could ask an admin to add this page's history to that article as well with a hist merge if it is important for some reason. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 23:48, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. Thank you. Rowan Forest (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 01:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note about article and talk history

Note that the history of this article and talk page are not the old history and talk page for the BFR (rocket) page, as both have been moved to the Starship development history title. Soumya-8974 was working on the merge and created a new article and redirected the others to it, but this isn't how merges are meant to be done as you lose all the edit history and page watchers from the primary page. Ideally Soumya-8974 would have just merged the ITS material and BFR material together at the BFR page, moved to the new title and a clean redirect created here. After the page swap that is essentially what has resulted anyway, minus a bit of history of Soumya-8974 doing the work of the merger, but I'm just trying to be clear what happened. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:23, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Insertcleverphrasehere: per WP:A and WP:CWW and since the edit histories do not match the pages they are supposed to represent by doing this, all of this should be reverted immediately and if they are not, I will start a WP:RFC. Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That can be disregarded. Discussion elsewhere had resulted in me considering other options. Steel1943 (talk) 19:49, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Steel1943, The edit history of BFR (rocket) is exactly where it should be. The article was meant to be RENAMED Starship development history, then a merger done. That is essentially what has happened now. The process of how it ended up happening was a bit roundabout, I'll agree. I do agree that the edit history of this page doesn't match, and that is an issue, but Soumya-8974 wasn't supposed to do the merger like this, and I can't help that now. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 19:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Insertcleverphrasehere: Was this an edit conflict? Either way, I do agree that this is all a bit of a mess. Steel1943 (talk) 19:57, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Steel1943, it was. Reply link will post even if other edits have been written before you finish writing. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 20:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]