Talk:Falcon 1/Archive 1

message: Pricing info should be removed.  Sentence 1, paragraph 2 should be condensed; we don't need all those details about the launch sites.  Payload Capabilities and Vehicle Details should be provided in an external link.  This is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a second internet.  –Floorsheim 04:38, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I respectfully disagree with part of this. Launch costs and payload capacities are usually the most important pieces of information for somebody using this article as a reference. --NeuronExMachina 08:29, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Please take a look at the rocket articles referenced above (e.g., Titan IV; Saturn I).  It is convention to include all of these items in space references, including Wikipedia, because it's all useful. Dschmelzer 16:18, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  It appears you're right.  Looks like I've spoken out of turn.  My apologies.  –Floorsheim 16:30, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: I am willing to accept NeuronExMachina's change. Dschmelzer 18:00, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Regarding the Vostok rocket, it is an old Soviet rocket, so cost information is unavailable.  Regarding SpaceShipOne, it is part of the Tier One program.  Cost information is given in the Tier One Wikipedia article.  Regarding the launch prices for Falcon I, the first launch of the rocket is a US government purchase, so the price is a matter of public record.  However, I agree that the price for the Falcon V article correctly could contain that language.  Dschmelzer 18:00, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That sound fine, in which case: Based on the US government purchase of 2004, the launch costs are.... (preferably better phrased) -- Solipsist 18:05, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: From RfC

message: Should this article mention how the rocket was publically unveiled some months ago in Washington, DC? I think that got a considerable amount of press attention. --NeuronExMachina 03:20, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the structure for those two articles is solid and should be propogated.  Dschmelzer 18:00, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: I would support this project.  Many of the launch systems articles could use some work.  Dschmelzer
Dang! I started creating a Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch Vehicles and got a fair bit along, and then I found out that there's already a Wikipedia:WikiProject Rockets. --NeuronExMachina 06:38, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: This is way off-topic here, but I have made Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch vehicles the main article and Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch Vehicles and Wikipedia:WikiProject Rockets redirects. I somewhat feel this might be better. Feel free to change if it doesn't suit. Ropers 21:04, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hm... I thought it was a semi-convention to capitalize the first letter of each word in a project name. I could be wrong, though. --NeuronExMachina 03:12, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Content and Structure 

message: I would like to issue a apology to Dschmelzer for my tone and the way I reacted with regards to this issue.
I still stick to my points and concerns and I still think the articles Falcon I, Falcon V and SpaceX could use further improvement. But my confrontationalist approach was really without merit, no matter how strong my concerns. 
If people agree, then I am ready archive this off the RfC page (please let me know). Ropers 22:49, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. On the plus side, the article has come along nicely. -- Solipsist 00:12, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I accept this apology. Dschmelzer 02:02, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apology