Jump to content

User talk:109.78.223.172

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CS1 error on List of spaceflight launches in July–December 2023

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page List of spaceflight launches in July–December 2023, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Taking Out The Trash. I noticed that you recently removed content from Comparison of orbital launch systems without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 14:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Ceres-1 (and Hyperbola-1) variants

[edit]

Hi, I thought it would be better for us to discuss the topic here instead of talking through edits. My main concern is that, as usual, wikipedia content has to be backed by reliable sources. At the moment we have no information on the type of upgrades brought by Galactic Energy in the occasion of aesthetically different versions of the Ceres-1 rocket, nor we have any clue about whether those variants have different designations and using made up ones is not really consistent with wikipedia guidelines. Moreover, different companies have different definitions of what is a "variant" of a rocket and what's just an upgrade (e.g., depite Falcon 9 development being formally halted with the Block 5 variant, it has received constant upgrades though the years that improved its performance despite no designation change). Same applies to Hyperbola-1. For this reason, I will reverse the page to a version whose content is verifiable, and not based on the inferences of an individual user. Fm3dici97 (talk) 08:08, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are saying but it shouldn't matter if the company has not announced new variants of the two rockets (ceres-1 and hyperbola-1) because there is clearly a significant change to the rockets whilst in SpaceX, yes they update f9 b5 a lot but with very small and discrete changes but if I do change it back, you will most likely revert my edits so I will try to find accurate sources for this information but for now here is the source I am getting these thoughts from: b14643.de 109.78.223.172 (talk) 14:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so I have finished some searching and found no official remarks on the variants of hyperbola-1 and ceres-1 but I did find more evidence supporting the variants on space.skyrocket.de. I have relied on this site for many rockets in this page because they have always been reliable, so when are you going to admit that the rockets have variants due to the significant design changes. Hyperbola 1A literally has a liquid upper stage and is with a smaller diameter then hyperbola 1 which has a solid upper stage. 109.78.223.172 (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with trying to introduce a distinction, I just think that using names like "Ceres-1A" and "Ceres-1B" could be misleading since they sound like official designation and the pages of the individual rockets don't mention at all those designations. Maybe using Gunter's Space Page designations, with opportune notes and/or legend entries at the top of the list and using him as a source could be the best compromise. Fm3dici97 (talk) 18:18, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it is good that we can find common ground, so how about instead of A and B we can just place a (1) and (2) or something like that which is found on Gunter's Space Page and since you reverted my edits can you please fix it with our new designations. 109.78.223.172 (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll take care of it. Fm3dici97 (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since the situation has evolved in the meantime I'll use this topic to address it again. It seems that now Galactic Energy refers to the sea launched version of Ceres-1 as Ceres-1S. How do you think it should be handled? In principle it's being publicly aknowledged as a variant, but I fear it's going to be like the Long March 11H variant of the Long March 11, i.e. almost identical with a different designation just to underline that it is sea launched. Fm3dici97 (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:109.78.223.172&oldid=1173427148"