Talk:Kwangmyŏngsŏng program

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Split[edit]

This material badly needs to be reorganized. We currently have the following related articles:

The normal organization would be:

Compare for example Apollo, Apollo program, Apollo 11. In this specific case, it might be possible to skip the Kwangmyŏngsŏng program article and put that detail into Korean Committee of Space Technology (until they start multiple follow-on programs), with links and some duplication in North Korean ballistic missile program. Rmhermen (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I would prefer leaving the background article here (ie Kwangmyŏngsŏng rather than Kwangmyŏngsŏng programme or such), but other than that I agree. --GW 17:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Oh, and the second launch should be split to Gwangmyeongseong-2, the third to Kwangmyŏngsŏng-2. --GW 17:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
      • I know in other some other cases, failures are only discussed on the program page and not given their own article. Mars 4 in the Mars probe prgram appears to be one such. A number of Explorer program failures do not have individual articles - but neither do a number of successful launches on that list. Rmhermen (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
        • As far as I know, the de facto project attitude is that all satellites qualify for articles. This would be no exception. Mars 4 is on my to do list. --GW 19:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I've gone ahead and split Kwangmyŏngsŏng-1. It shouldn't be controversial as we've been splitting articles like this off for months. --GW 21:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Agree. It should mirror other space programs' formatting. Annihilatron (talk) 15:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a year and a half later, and the news item has calmed down, but this issue hasn't been resolved. As discussed about, I think many details on the individual launched should be moved to the relevant articles; at the moment it looks like there is a lot of unnecessary duplication. Mlm42 (talk) 23:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

  • I have made a start on the clean up, and created a disambiguation page. More work will need to be done, and links to Kwangmyŏngsŏng will need to be checked to find out which article they should be aimed at. SilkTork *YES! 11:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Kwangmyŏngsŏng program[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Kwangmyŏngsŏng program's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "BMD":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 20:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Juche Korea![edit]

Imperialists's NORAD admits the 100th anniversary DPRK satellite has just reached orbit on top of a 4-stage rocket. All over on CNN and BBC. Russians claim to track its "Sputnik beeps" already.87.97.103.62 (talk) 07:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Did the failed launch of the Taepodong-2 in 2006 carry a satellite?[edit]

Concerning reports that the maiden launch of the Taepodong-2 in 2006 may have been a satellite launch attempt, it's not surprising that North Korea has not commented on the disastrous end to the Taepodong-2's first flight, nor have foreign government officials provided independent confirmation the rocket was carrying a satellite. The possibilities of the failed launch being a satellite launch attempt and a suborbital flight of a sounding rocket to test the airframe for the Unha rocket are equally likely because the launch took place from a fixed position on a launch pad (not a mobile platform as is the case with operational ICBMs) and North Korea still has not mastered the technology to make a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on the Taepodong-2. 68.4.28.33 (talk) 05:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian

Article update[edit]

The section "Tenth anniversary" should be deleted to reflect the fact that South Korea's Naro-1 had two failures and one success in 2009, 2010, and 2013 respectively and that the Sohae launch site has been mentioned in official statements. In this sense, South Korea was already beaten to the punch in the space race between the two Koreas. 68.4.28.33 (talk) 20:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kwangmyŏngsŏng program. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Kwangmyŏngsŏng program. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)