Talk:2009 Norwegian spiral anomaly

Paranormal Start‑class

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Norway Start‑class

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in Norway may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Duplicate page (history merge will be needed)

For discussion on what the article should be named, see the discussion here. MuZemike 23:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from duplicated talk page

How is it that the spiral just so happened to appear exactly perpendicular to the viewpoint of the people photographing it? Is it something to do with optics (like how rainbows always appear end-on as well)? Or are there more photos of the spiral, taken by other people who weren't perfectly lined up, and those photos just aren't getting as much attention? -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 21:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From someone highly experienced with astronomical phenomenon, I think it's something of that nature. It could just be the shadow of an asteroid or something that had an eccentric orbit and passed closer to earth. ceranthor 22:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate page (history merge will be needed)

A duplicate page was created at Northern Norway spiral light. A history merge will be needed (which I can happily do), but what should the title of the article be? Suggestions? MuZemike 23:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained Lights of Norway? Norway Spiral Lights? Unexplained Spiral Lights? 2009 Unexplained Spiral Lights? I think it'd be best to somehow communicate that this happened in the sky and less important that Norway be mentioned. What, where, when, and why can be explained in the article, it doesn't need to be in the title.--v/r - T P 01:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Failed rocket launch

There are several inaccuracies with this article. First the blue haze is called a "beam of light". It was very obviously not a beam of light, rather a spiral of gas that lasted well beyond the white spiral event. Secondly there is no mention of the columnar cloud identified from other angles, which are very typical of terrestrial based rocket launches.

As an engineer in the space systems industry, I can correctly identify this as a failed terrestrial rocket or missile launch.

Based on the evidence and images, my professional assessment of the event is as follows: 1. sea based launch. Successful first stage MECO (main engine cut-off). 2. most likely nozzle impact or other catastrophic event during first stage seperation or second stage ignition. 3. second stage burn seems to suggest a gradual control loss, similar to the Space X Falcon 1 event during their second test failure 4. catastrophic control loss resulted in a tumble of the remaining rocket segments, spraying propellent into the surrounding space, creating a cartwheel display. 5. the variation in color would suggest solid and liquid propellant, most likely hydrazine (blue) and Aluminum propellant (white) 6. burn out or detonation outside the earths effective atmosphere, dispursing the white propellent. the remaining blue gas was material trailed out during failure which remained suspended in the earth's atmosphere.

A professional summary would help build credibility to this article, and end UFO speculation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.31.106.34 (talk) 06:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To the space systems engineer: fantastic! In order to satisfy Wikipedia guidelines, you should present your argument on an external website and then someone (other than you) can incorporate it into the article, referencing your article.

In all likelihood, this was a failed Bulava launch. Nothing anomalous about that. _{Óðinn ☭☆ talk} 08:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

China event date

The video of the event in China was posted on YouTube in April 2009, but does the source state that the event took place also that same month? __meco (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Multiple reliable source now link this display to a failed Bulava launch. [1][2]. It was also confirmed by the Russian defence ministry [3] A separate article, therefore, is hardly warranted. _{Óðinn ☭☆ talk} 10:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Should be merged. Fences&Windows 15:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep separate, this achieved plenty of coverage as an independent topic. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

During the first 24 hrs, perhaps. Now, it is clearly not an independent topic, which doesn't warrant more than a few sentences or a paragraph at most. _{Óðinn ☭☆ talk} 23:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Graeme, you should read WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENT. Merge is much the best option here. Fences&Windows 02:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it should be merged. Russia is admitting to the launch, but not to a connection between the spiral effect and the failed launch. There are valid disputes (ie: non-conspiracy or UFO-boosters) as to whether the spiral effect was due to a failed rocket launch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.215.129.235 (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People, an absolutely identical effect is produced by

File:Ccli2.jpg

300

...the Mania SCX-series of scanning programmable spiral effects theatrical projectors, including an expanding black circle in the center of an identical blue and white spiral. Demo videos are available on the Manufacturer's site.

the "theatrical projector theory" is plausible but you need a very powerful lamp (12-20kW or more) not a standard 150-300 Watts halogen lamp... Tremaster (talk) 03:02, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my town they've used much bigger skytrackers for years so I'm surpriced people still get exited over this. Though I admit I was scared too when I first saw similar lights, late at night, when I was walking through a forest alone :)

Anyways I can't believe this article junks Wikipedia. How is this possible it hasn't been deleted so far?

I guess the phenomenon of "2009 Norwegian spiral anomaly" will be a case study for academics on how the gossip spreads78.131.137.50 (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW if it was a "Global Warming" related talkpage Your post would have already been deleted and You would be banned as a "sockpuppet".78.131.137.50 (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]