Talk:Shackleton Energy Company

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shackleton Energy Company 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

It is requested that an image or photograph of Shackleton Energy Company be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Texas may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

It is requested that a logo be included in this article to improve its quality.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images. The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

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

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

Mining Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

PopSci article on Stone

A Popular Science article on Stone and predecessor technology development efforts, perhaps leading to moon exploration, is

Robot Subs in Space^{citation formatted in DEPTHX article},

and here is another article with timeframe and cost estimates for the moon project (which are not yet covered in the article)

Texas Firm Draws up Plans for Orbital Gas Station.

N2e (talk) 04:42, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image(s) needed

This article could use an image or two to make it a better article. I don't know much about Wikipedia image policies on fair use; I just know they are a bit complex. Could the article use, under fair use considerations, one of the images in a news article or from the company website? Help from an image expert is requested. N2e (talk) 21:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added the {{Image}} on the Talk Header. - Ninney (talk) 16:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues

Reading this article just now, it is clear that this ambitious project is a long way from viability and the article needs revision based on that fact. In fact, a case can be made for merging it or deleting it altogether. I gently suggest to those interested in preserving this article that it be updated and rewritten with a more encyclopedic tone. As it is, it comes off as dubious PR, with the stinger about the crowd funding failure seemingly tacked on. Jus da fax 08:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues, 2.0

The main issue with this article at this point appears to be (or was, until I fixed it) the rather pejorative editing regarding the company's existence (yes it still exists), the website's existence (contra the article as it read until this morning, yes it does exist), etc. Shackleton may never get off the ground, but that's no reason to editorialize against it on Wikipedia. Moreover, the rather strident "no legal mechanism exists" language is simply incorrect, or at least incomplete, and would equally apply to Google-backed Planetary Resources if it were true (do we really think Google is stupid and/or burning money on something from which they think they cannot profit?). Indeed, there was actually a Wall Street Journal article on this just the other day, here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/whos-in-charge-of-outer-space-1495195097 These sorts of stories appear with growing frequency in the major financial media as companies like Google and SpaceX (and Boeing and Lockheed Martin) push more deeply into this (pardon the term) space.

If I have time, I'll provide some edits to that section, but the section really shouldn't exist, or at least shouldn't exist to any more negative degree than it does in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_Resources (oh wait, it doesn't appear there at all).

Someone seems to have it in for this company. I have no axe to grind about the company, but this is terribly inappropriate for Wikipedia. HenryV1415 (talk) 16:00, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Shackleton Energy Company. 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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:49, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable

What's notable about this wannabe 'company'? They've failed to raise any funding, they create no product. They have managed to generate enough PR to get this article ... which is about as notable as dozens of music groups that actually -do- produce something. Twang (talk) 18:46, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]