Template talk:Space tourism

message: A couple of issues here.  First, it appears this template is having both private space flight and space tourism combined, which seems to be rather cross topic.  Second, the template is being plastered on articles which have no mention in the template itself.  My prime example is SpaceX.  Someone put the template across every SpaceX related article, but neither SpaceX nor any of its products is mentioned in the template.  Beyond that, with the primary focus being towards tourism, the template doesn't seem appropriate for SpaceX to begin with. --StuffOfInterest 12:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the first point, I personally don't see Space Tourism and Private Spaceflight to be cross topic. Although I agree one does not always include the other. Maybe the name of the template should be changed.. I see this as linking areas of non-government space use.  For the second point, This template is only a couple of days old, and will be improved as I get the time. SpaceX are clearly involved in private spaceflight so added the template. My reasons for plastering the template everywhere was to let people with an interest in the topic see it and maybe get involved. You are, of course, free to remove it if you disagree :) --Raerth 17:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Plastering it everywhere is not really an acceptable method to inform people of its existence.  A better method would have been to add a post somewhere on the Village pump or elsewhere in the Community Portal.  I'd suggest removing it from any article not directly pertaining to Space Tourism, and creating a separate template dealing with the specifics of private spaceflight.  I'm not a fan of lumping everything into single templates, as that causes them to grow beyond reasonable sizes. -- Huntster T • @ • C 23:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placed on inappropriate articles 

message: I've reworked the template to standardise it with other templates (just a general style).  However, while doing so, I pared down a lot of the material that didn't directly pertain to space tourism.  If you want to create a private spacecraft template, that'd be fine, but to combine the two probably isn't a good idea, since they aren't necessarily mutually inclusive.  They may cross boundaries occasionally, but they aren't the same thing. -- Huntster T • @ • C 11:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Narrowing down of template 

message: None of the competitions currently listed have anything to do with tourism. Well, some GLXP entries could at best be "virtual tourism"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.58.32 (talk) 01:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Both the Ansari X-Prize and Bigelow's America's Space Prize are directly related to space tourism. The GLXP can be considered as it is aimed at fostering technologies to allow a private Apollo-style mission to the moon. I've removed the last two as being very tangential indeed to space tourism: N-Prize is targeted as reducing launch costs, and both Centennial Challenges are targeted at non-tourism technologies (space elevators and resource production on the moon). — Huntster (t @ c) 02:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competitions 

message: Now that Rocketplane Kistler is no more, shouldn't it be removed from the list of major companies? PistolPete037 (talk) 11:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RpK 

message: Should it be Orbital ATK rather than Orbital Sciences and while definitely are doing spacecraft like Cygnus, is there any ongoing tourist work? crandles (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing on page indicates doing anything with space tourism. cn tag has been there for a year so removed. crandles (talk) 00:20, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orbital ATK 

message: I think that suborbital tourism should be split into a separate article, leaving this as an orbital and supraorbital template. Suborbital seems like it will get intensive soon, and the number of tourists and missions will takeoff. The defunct and current suborbital-only organizations should be moved off as well as other such sub-orbital only content (like suborbital spaceplane), to aling it with other suborbital content such as SpaceShipOne/Two/VG, New Shepard -- 65.93.183.33 (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Suborbital split