Talk:Vostochny Cosmodrome

message: :Regarding the template  used on this page, please join the discussion at Template talk:Spaceport#Shorter names.
:(sdsds - talk) 23:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorter names in Spaceport template 

message: can anybody check this?
Currently it says: "Satellites bound for geostationary orbit and high inclination orbits can be currently launched from Plesetsk Cosmodrome in northwestern Russia."
I'm pretty shure geostationary is wrong. It is the opposite of high inclination! Perhaps the author meant "Polar orbits" or "Molniya orbits"!?
I don't have any sources for this but my knwledge from spaceflight lectures in university. Plesetsk is a pretty bad place to launch for geostationary.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donkracho (talk • contribs) 19:34, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probably found an error 

message: I recently addedtwo sentences to the article, with a citation to a reliable source.  Another editor reverted, saying in the edit comment:  "this doesn't seem to be a reliable source (it's a blog). also, the wording was not neutral"
Per WP:BRD, I'm happy to engage the topic on the Talk page while we work to improve the article.
The sentences I added were:  
:"In November 2012, press reports indicated that the Russian government is having difficulty in finding a good use for the new spaceport, and that "other government ministries — which are avoiding the project like the plague — have taken to calling the project a 'dolgostroi,' which is Russian for an endless construction boondoggle."
:"The first launch from Vostochny unlikely to occur until 2018 at the earliest due to construction delays."  
1. The wording of the sentences added maintained WP:NPOV and were consistent with the source.
2. The source is a WP:RS.  It is a standard credentialed space press outfit, and is widely used to support WP:V claims in the Wikipedia encyclopedia.
3. If the concern is that the claim should possibly be in a different section of the Wikipedia article, I would agree.  I thought about creating a section or subsection entitled "Controversy" -- but was unsure if that one sentence would really justify a separate section.
What specifically did you find to be "non nuetral" about the wording?  Was it the words that were quoted form the source?  And if it is non-neutral, why not fix the wording because, on Wikipedia, WP:Anyone can edit; so just work to improve the article, rather than deleting material that is verifiably cited.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: With no consensus or support for leaving the material out of the article, I have added it back in, as it was originally above.  The newsource Parabolic Arc is a standard space media newsource, and is widely used to source spaceflight-related articles in the English wikipedia.  I am aware of no discussions on WP:RS or elsewhere that have indicated any questions about Parabolic Arc as a source.  I find the language used to be NPOV, as I stated above.  If other editors think it can be improved, then edit it, don't delete it.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 16:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of sourced material 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Vostochny Cosmodrome. 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/20120625125626/http://dalss.ru:80/tekusee/2635/ to http://www.dalss.ru/tekusee/2635/
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 09:36, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to Spaceflight Now, the first launch is scheduled for 0201 GMT on April 27th, 2016. The article should be updated then.  John Nagle (talk) 04:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  First launch scheduled for April 27th, 2016.  

message: This article starts by stating the location of the cosmodrome "...under construction on the 51st parallel north..." but then later states,
"The planned total area is 551.5 km^2, being a region approximately 30 km in diameter centred on 51°53′N 128°20′E Coordinates: 51°53′N 128°20′E." Surely then, the site is self-evidently on the 52nd parallel? A minute of latitude is 1.85km and so therefore the middle-northern part of the cosmodrone does actually sit exactly right on top of the 52nd parallel, the northern part of the site even extends roughly 3km to the north of the 52nd parallel. The rest of the launch site circles around the 52nd parallel, with even the southern most perhipery of the cosmodrome site not being far away and obviously much closer to the 52nd than to the 51st parallel.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.149.70 (talk) 00:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  51st or 52nd Parallel? 

message: Improved the article creating a separate section about the corruption scandal. That sectionhttps://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_(%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC)#%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BF%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8B exists in the corresponding article in Russian. Also added some information about the delay in the payment of wages and rising price tags. Cskamoscow100 (talk) 2:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  December 2017 

message: Президент уже сказал! 
Правительство? 
Или на космодроме все с мешками денег скорее в тайгу! Закопать .. 
Могу сигарету оставить докурить.. телефон бесплатно послушаем .. ) 
176.59.211.12 (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "КП телефона" спрашивает-интересуётца ..