Talk:Intelsat 708

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Intelsat 708 article.
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

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 15, 2009 and February 15, 2014.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

China

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Casualty

There are other Chinese sources say the death were 67.[1]--Voidvector 04:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would have liked to confirm that, however, the link's already broken. --朝彦 (Asahiko) 05:58, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this is confusing I've found everything between 6 and 500. Currently it's listed as 500 on the 1996 page. I edited it but it was reverted.Everett3 (talk) 07:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This video talks about two separate incidents, which may account for the confusion. -- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 16:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Neutral sources claimed that the number of fatalities was likely to number in the thousands and possibly tens of thousands." What neutral sources? If there are any such sources they should be quoted. This statement is unverifiable and should be removed. The US government said approximately 200 but there seems to be a bidding war going on to see who can come up with the most outrageous claim.

Paste this grid reference into Google Maps, hit Satellite View and see how sparsely populated the area is: 102.0371E, 28.233N Flanker235 (talk) 09:30, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try playing this game. There's no "neutral sources" backing the claim above so I just deleted it. We'll see if it reverts. -- KarlHallowell (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Space Review article cited to support to "200-500 deaths" claim actually makes a pretty convincing case that fatalities were not in the hundreds. I've updated the article accordingly. Jpatokal (talk) 02:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This video also talks about two launch failures. On the first failure the rocket exploded in place, with many villagers curiously watching nearby. On the second launch, a year later, it flew into the village. (talk) 21:33 12. February 2016 (UTC)

"However, American estimates state the actual death toll to be in the hundreds or thousands." Reference 1, however, does not contain any content that claims there are American estimates of "hundreds or thousands". Where does this claim come from? 108.51.46.192 (talk) 23:34, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere, apparently. I've reverted that claim. Burden of proof is on the person who added it in the first place; if they provide a source, it can be re-added. NekoKatsun (talk) 17:34, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date

Hi, it's the first time I write anything down on Wikipedia so I'm frightened to mess up, sorry if that happens, but anyway just wanted to say that I think the date should be displayed as the local one, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers#Time_zones ("Give dates and times appropriate to the time zone where an event took place. For example, the date of the attack on Pearl Harbor should be December 7, 1941 (Hawaii time/date)")- the way it is shown as of this message ("14 February 1996 (15 February local time)")is a bit confusing imo. Not going to change it myself as I'm unexperienced and may be in the wrong here, but just wanted to point it out. 89.92.123.122 (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Location

The nearest reference to a "Mayelin" i can find near the launch center is this: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Zeyuanxiang+Mayelin+Health+Station/@28.221174,102.049621,17z/ -- is this in the right general area? -- Impsswoon (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable ending to "Launch Failure" section leads to unreliable sources

Felt a bit off when the section ended on "unlikely hundreds of deaths" when checking the source as an online magazine and not an International or at least Chinese vs US State report breakdown. Found "Chen Lan" as author and the Space Review offers up this biography:

Chen Lan is an independent analyst who created the Go Taikonauts! (www.go-taikonauts.com), the earliest unofficial web site about the Chinese space program, in 1998. He is also co-founder and major contributor of the Go Taikonauts! electronic magazine on iPad that provides in-depth reports on the Chinese space program.

Well, of course this raised eyebrows because 1998 is quite early for internet usage where I'm from! So I googled a bit and there's a Chen Lan who is a Condensed Matter Physicist at The Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing. Very possibly a party source without other disproving evidence. The section ends poorly given the seemingly biased source. Ending it with a bit more even handedness might fix it. I'm new here so I hope someone with a bit more experience will come along and weigh in in the next few days or so. Thanks!

SkylabOverSydney0079 (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SkylabOverSydney0079. The best place to get other opinions on the reliability of this source is the Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Intelsat708.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Article

This is about a Chinese rocket disaster, not an American satellite. The title and opening line should reflect this. See the Nedelin Disaster article for a similar example. 76.188.120.7 (talk) 20:23, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]