Talk:Shenzhou 7

message: Is it really that hard for people to understand the difference between RUSSIA and the SOVIET UNION?  the first spacewalk was done BY THE SOVIET UNION - that is, it drew on the combined talents of not just russia, but engineers and specialists from the entire union.  This is why the rockets at the suits had CCCP (USSR) written on them, not "Russia."   The current space suit is a copy of a Russian one because the company is now actually Russian.  To not get this correct over and over and over and over again both inappropriately fuels the russian nationalist ego and does dishonor to the many talented people of many nationalities and ethnicities who felt that they were working on a SOVIET space program.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.16.244 (talk) 13:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russia vs Soviet Union 

message: In which way does Shenzhou 7 start the second phase of Project 921 as the article says in the intro? Kinamand (talk) 22:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For Project 921-2, China will dock a crew vehicle with a previously orbited space station. Whereas it's easy to think of "docking" as establishing a pressurized passageway between the vehicle and the station, that may not be the case in this design. The first crew transfer ever accomplished, between Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5, was accomplished by a spacewalk. So the author of the phrase you question may be implying the spacewalk aspect of Shenzhou 7 is a precursor to a transfer of crew from a launch vehicle to a station. (sdsds - talk) 04:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second phase of Project 921 

message: Does anyone know if the Shenzhou 7 launch and mission will be broadcast somewhere on the internet? 130.243.249.252 (talk) 00:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder this too. I will try to find out if it is broadcast on any of the CCTV channels and get back.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.159.190.87 (talk) 11:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broadcast? 

message: Someone (most likely not a native English speaker) has made a mess in this article about the EVA suits and worries about "gravity damagE", I'll try to interpret what he or she has been trying to say and make corrections.Roswell Crash Survivor (talk) 05:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editors! 

message: The taikonaut articles need updating, the six related to this mission are not completely uptodate or link to Shenzhou 7 70.55.203.112 (talk) 11:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  taikonauts 

message: Grammar in this article is terrible!  For example: "This subject to changes at when launch happen, becauses of worry that Orlan-M will not sufficient for make gravity strain"
What?
:Someone probably used babelfish... 70.55.203.112 (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: The article should be restructured as a timeline of events, instead of the current jumbled "highlights". Jpatokal (talk) 10:01, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline

message: the external links and the references are in all-chinese. while its quite fair to use certain sources in different languages, the name and info would be better in english with a note off to the side saying it's in chinese. this is used elsewhere in the english wikipedia, at least. Lihaas (talk) 07:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I went through last night and changed the Publisher info to English for those that I recognized (新华 to Xinhua, 人民日报 to People's Daily, etc.).  There are still some that are news sources with which I'm not familiar, or are minor enough that they don't even really have an English name; for those, I think it's best that a native speaker go through and add the English names if there is one, or if not just give the pinyin for the Chinese name.  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 14:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  foreign language 

message: someone should write an article on the spacesuits... Feitian spacesuit or Feitian 70.55.203.112 (talk) 10:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  spacesuit 

message: There are only two backup crew members listed, but later the article states that a total of six astronauts trained for this mission... Bgwwlm (talk) 16:41, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not inconsistent, that just means two people were sent home without being chosen for any responsibilities in the mission. Ham Pastrami (talk) 02:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are three backup crew members listed in the article.  Shenzhou 7#Back-up crew.  —Politizer( talk | contribs ) 02:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, I undid the vandalism so that it is now accurate. 70.24.137.253 (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Backup crew

message: Jonathan has a draft of his space report number 601 available. It has more information on Shenzhou 7, but he has flagged it as a draft and that it "may include wild rumours and downright nonsense". It does have more detailed EVA times than the BBC though. Here is the link - I will not cite it until Jonathan makes it official:
OFFICIAL STOP PRESS
-84user (talk) 23:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jonathan's Space Report - Next Issue 

message: This morning I tried to translate the headlines/titles of as many of the Chinese sources as I could.  Those of you who are native Chinese speakers will probably notice that some of my translations may be a little off, and you are free to correct them as you see fit.  I did translations even when I wasn't 100% I understood the headline right, assuming that maybe someone later will notice the bad translation and fix it—so I figured that way it would be better to have bad translations than none at all.  If you notice a translation that needs to be fixed, please don't hesitate to help out by correcting it!  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 23:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations of source titles 

message: Is there a name to the pressure suit worn during launch and reentry? It's not the Orlan spacesuit or the Feitian spacesuit. 70.55.203.112 (talk) 00:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  pressure suit 

message: Regarding the removal of Epoch Times footnotes in this edit:  I don't see why you call Epoch Times "hardly a verifiable source."  Sure, they are controversial, but lots of news sources are; people accuse both Fox and CNN of being biased, that doesn't mean they should never be cited.  And the majority of the sources in this article are Xinhua and People's Daily, which are hardly seen as glowing standards of journalism by most Westerners (note to Chinese people: I'm not trying to pass any judgment about those news sources here.  I'm merely pointing out that in the West they are at least as controversial as Epoch Times, if not more).  Just because some people don't like Epoch Times doesn't mean everyone doesn't; see The Epoch Times.  And, besides, the information in the False News Report section of the article is fairly credible because it's mentioned in many other news sources; the reason the Epoch Times source is being kept there as well is because it contains the full text of the original Xinhua article in question, which makes it a nice resource for readers.  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 13:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What happened Politizer?  You don't write replies in the "Fake News Report" section anymore.  Come back.  129.173.136.51 (talk) 15:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please only leave messages that are relevant and constructive to this section.  If you want to discuss the Fake News Report in general, you may do so in that section.  If you have personal issues or you want to stalk me, you can take it up with me at my talk page.  Please do not leave inappropriate messages in this section, as it just makes it more difficult for people to discuss the issue in a constructive way.  Thank you.  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 15:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epoch Times 

message: Ok, I am back everyone.  Hope you all had a good time while I am gone.  In anycase, old section was getting long and hard to follow so I'l start a new one.  Now, let's not confuse the two "events" here.
<BR>
1).  Shenzhou 7
<BR>
2).  The Fake News Report
<BR>
And that's pretty much all there is to it.  I'll be here all week.  24.224.182.97 (talk) 05:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There has already been consensus; for at least a week, no one has been messing with that section.  Please read the old discussion before you open this up all over again.  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 14:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Section on Fake News Report 

message: This probably won't be enough to appease all the people who object to the subsection about the false news report, but anyway, I was just thinking, we could change the name of the Controversies section to something more like "Media coverage," with the "False news report" subsection within that.  Then we'd just have to add some other media coverage stuff outside of "False news report" (to avoid undue weight concerns).  Does anyone object to this renaming?  —Politizer( talk • contribs ) 23:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Controversies" section name change 

message: Some, hysterical imagining things, are giving it a weaponized role.  Geo8rge (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So far, this is all primary source.  Once a secondary source comes forth and says something along the lines of "some wackos said X," then we can include this.  Until then, however, there's not much we can do, as we personally can't make judgments about these articles' claims.  (In other words, there can be no "controversy" until a secondary source says there is...if it's just articles that Wikipedia editors disagree about, that doesn't qualify as controversy.) —Politizer talk/contribs 05:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If it does hafve bx-1 designation that should be added.  Too bad there isn't more detail somewere about the mini sat.Geo8rge (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

text: The weaponization stuff is probably more of a cultrual interest, sort of like they hysteria arounding sputnik.   It is interesting that such a small part of the program is getting attention.Geo8rge (talk) 06:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Politizer looked at the links you gave very closely, or else s/he has a very strange definition of "primary source". Juzhong (talk) 12:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The mini satellite seems to be given the designation "BX-1"

message: Politizer rev my edit, and called it 'China bashing', which in itself seems to be a knee-jerk reaction. 
# This article has a serious NPOV issue, because nearly all the references quoted are from Xinhua news source, like TASS of the now defunct USSR, is a state-run propaganda department.
# If Epoch Times is regarded as biased and unreliable source, the same should be applied to Xinhua news, because they each represent the two extreme ends of POV, because they are constantly at each other's throat. All wikipedia editors should stick to NPOV editions, Shenzhou or no Shenzhou.
# To fake space news, is not the first time, and it will not be the last time. And Chinese was not the first one either.
# Nasa had done it so many times. Moon landings fake
# What about this one, 911 hoax
# 2008 Chinese milk scandal, poison milk, poison eggs, poison pet-food, fake medicine, poison soya beans, the lists go on and on. Fake space-walk? Is not news anymore, and is not 'China Bashing' neither.
'undue weight'? Maybe  you have just arrived from Mars. Arilang   talk 20:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already information in the article saying clearly that the fake news happened; I don't see a need to belabor it.  A few months ago, around when SZ7 was just ending, there was a huge argument going on at this page over whether or not the section should be included at all, with many Chinese nationals (I assume—most of the people in the argument were editing from IPs) arguing that the whole story about the news source should be removed because it wasn't directly relevant to the outcome of the space flight.  I fought to keep the story in the article.  Now I find myself attacked from the other end, for not putting enough of the story into the article.  If you believe more of that information should be included, that's fine, but let's hear out what some other editors have to say here.  Thank you, —Politizer talk/contribs 20:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to you Politizer, as I have not read the early discussion. You may not know China propaganda department do have paid-netizens and paid-bloggers in blogosphere to influence public opinions. If you can read Chinese, you will find plenty of them in zh.wikipedia(Chinese version wiki), some of them have even become admins and moderators. And Chinese wikipedia have Morph into a subset of Xinhua news. A sad story. Arilang   talk 21:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No apologies needed :).  You are right about paid netizens, and I'm aware of that problem (although in the earlier dispute above, I think most of the interactants were overseas Chinese university students...although that doesn't exclude the possibility that a stipulation of their funding was to do internet-related activities, which is not unheard of...but anyway, that dispute is over now, and there is no need to speculate about the identity of the other parties when we have no evidence about them).  In this case I simply think that there's already enough information in the article—more refs are always welcome, and I have retained the refs you added, but more prose treatment of the topic may not be necessary—and that overemphasizing the point would actually reflect poorly on us, rather than reflecting poorly on Xinhua, by making us appear biased and anti-Chinese. —Politizer talk/contribs 21:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: China bashing?

message: "Chinese President Hu Jintao talks on a        phone that connected him at the Beijing Aerospace Control Center (BACC)        with astronauts on the spacecraft Shenzhou-7 in Beijing, capital of China,        Sept. 27, 2008. (Xinhua Photo/Li Xueren)"
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10122755.htm
This all important piece of news should be included in the article I think. Arilang   talk 22:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: President Hu talking to astronauts

message: The image :File:CNSA.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:CNSA.svg

message: The Controversies section seems to contain no mention of how many people say the spacewalk was faked. See for example this article and this video. Shouldn't the article at least mention that some people think it's a big fake? --82.171.70.54 (talk) 22:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I wondered the same thing. I couldn't find much information besides blogs and YouTube videos though, so perhaps it is seen as not notable enough. For myself, I don't have the time to keep up with much news, and didn't even hear about these calls of it being fake until now, some 5 months after the mission. Maybe if some more major news sources could be found discussing the controversy, it could be added, but I don't feel like digging them out. --Mike | Contrib 14:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's just some random guy's youtube shenanigans.  Someone brought this up at this page a few days ago and then quickly reverted himself (see this revision). rʨanaɢ (formerly Politizer)talk/contribs 14:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hong Kong's Ta Kung Pao reported on the possible fake and interviewed a Chinese engineer for an explanation.  _dk (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the arguments are no different from Apollo Moon Landing hoax conspiracy theories.  99.244.189.150 (talk) 14:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking the same thing, however the Epoch Times, which as far as I know is a pretty credible paper has a few articles on it (http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china/shenzhou-vii-fake-spacewalk-5809.html) citing credible scientists so I think it may well be worth at least mentioning.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.202.187 (talk) 09:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake Spacewalk 

message: This was removed: The EVA carried out during the flight makes China the third country to have conducted an EVA, after the Soviet Union and the United States. I don't agree with the removal, but I can see how the editor may have been confused. From the Extra-vehicular activity article, it seems that people of other nationalities (British, French, and Canadian) have done EVAs, but they were always on US or Russian missions. Any suggestions on how to reword this to make it clearer? rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed that this wording apparently caused some confusion. It is also difficult because we consider the space program of Russia to be the same as the space program of the Soviet Union. "EVAs had previously been conducted by the space programs of the Soviet Union (later Russia) and the United States." (sdsds - talk) 03:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewording EVA 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Shenzhou 7. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090214044740/http://www.kuaibao.net:80/html/2008-09/03/content_64419025.htm to http://www.kuaibao.net/html/2008-09/03/content_64419025.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Shenzhou 7. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203060101/http://www.nationalspacesymposium.org/symposium-awards to http://www.nationalspacesymposium.org/symposium-awards
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203060101/http://www.nationalspacesymposium.org/symposium-awards to http://www.nationalspacesymposium.org/symposium-awards
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:40, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Shenzhou 7. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090213165352/http://news.longhoo.net/gb/longhoo/news/tech/userobject1ai796208.html to http://news.longhoo.net/gb/longhoo/news/tech/userobject1ai796208.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Shenzhou 7. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081001021826/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/28/content_10128407.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/28/content_10128407.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080929063820/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/28/content_10129558.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/28/content_10129558.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081001020959/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10122420.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10122420.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928132401/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10121998.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10121998.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080930155350/http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/27/content_10124543.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/27/content_10124543.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928044815/http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/25/content_10110233.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/25/content_10110233.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080125005254/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-06/01/content_6182498.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-06/01/content_6182498.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081010133535/http://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2006-09/21/content_5119752.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2006-09/21/content_5119752.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090213205856/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10123628_4.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10123628_4.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928044508/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/26/content_10112553.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/26/content_10112553.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928104838/http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/24/content_10104656.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/24/content_10104656.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928132231/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10123015.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/27/content_10123015.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080927221510/http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/24/content_10104787.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2008-09/24/content_10104787.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081001161804/http://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2008-06/12/xin_0420605121410078265007.jpg to http://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2008-06/12/xin_0420605121410078265007.jpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified