Talk:Soviet space dogs

Russian vs Soviet

Please give credit where credit is due. While the LANGUAGE of certain items may be RUSSIAN, the proper designation for the technology and achievements in general is SOVIET, not RUSSIAN. The country was the SOVIET UNION, and failing to acknowledge this unduly praises Russian contributions while ignoring the contributions of the thousands of non-Russians who were part of this. To do otherwise would be as patently wrong as saying "the English army won the Battle of Britain" or "The Californian hockey team won the 1980 Olympic ice hockey." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.7.28 (talk) 07:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Earth-born

Laika was the "first living Earth-born creature in orbit...." I'm glad the author cleared up that Laika wasn't from Mercury or Uranus.

The "earth born" has its place here because you can't space out(haha for the pun) the possibility that other living creatures were in space before Laika. --DocBrown 23:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Confirmation from independant sources?

With all due respect, this is the most unverified article I've seen in wikipedia.The "space race" of the time was the biggest propaganda item in world politics.The Russians launched Sputnik, and the signal was picked up by nations around the world.Has any independant authority witnessed the launch & landing of these animals? Unlikely.Why is it unchallenged?The successful launch & return of living creatures from Earth is historic.To accept the Russian version is naive at best.Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect, if you're unable to properly identify the country involved as 'the Soviet Union' and not 'Russia', then I'm not sure that your objection is worthy of further discussion. 82.26.7.28 (talk) 07:17, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

There is ample evidence that the R-1, R-2 and R-5 rockets were used on geophysical missions -- eyewitness accounts in biographies, photographs, the equipment in museums, journal papers, even declassifed CIA reports. Mr. Mallyscrub may be confused into thinking these early 1950s flights were orbital. They were not putting dogs into orbit, they were just geophysical sounding rockets fired straight up and falling back to Earth. It is a simple matter to reprogram ballistic missiles to do that. 24.16.88.14 (talk) 08:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Translations

Would the anonymous users who have kindly provided translations for the dog names be willing to do a full Russian translation for the Russian Wikipedia? :-) Zerbey 04:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

On a Similar Topic of Translations

84.10.168.106 (talk • contribs • count) has been making questionable edits to this article, regarding the translation of the dogs' names. For instance, Pchelka = "Little Flea" as opposed to "Little Bee." I frankly have no knowledge of Russian and do not know whether his translations are accurate; however, I assume someone here must. As (s)he's editing from an IP account and leaving no edit summaries, I felt it best to inform the regular editors of this article that such changes have been made, so that they can review them and revert them if necessary. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

"Pchelka" is "Little Bee". --ajvol 10:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you should merge it 107.140.30.83 (talk) 20:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

No keep it the way it is keep belka and strelka on the same page Tanktanooki (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ren & Stimpy

Should the Ren & Stimpy episode with the obvious allusion be mentioned in the article? I think it is a humorous allusion to this subject. Rintrah 09:11, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The doggies in the picture of the lead are cute! Rintrah 09:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Break Up

This article is about Belka and Strelka, not about the history of Dogs in Space (pun). I feel that it should be broken into a new article: History of Russian Canine Spaceflights (or something else...), but I don't know the appropriate template. Geo 03:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

If it is a joke, I don't understand. Mukadderat 02:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops! Sorry, I misread. I was ill then, after all... Geo 22:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Russian pig in space

Does any one want to write an article about this? Mukadderat 02:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Despite what the text of the article may claim, the apparatus in the accompanying photos make it clear this flight was not a spaceflight. (sdsds - talk) 22:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Russian dogs?

Is this an insult for Russian people? It was a Soviet space program. The name should be Soviet space dogs. --Tigga en 08:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

You do have a point, if enough people post requesting the change the article can be moved. However, there are many other pages that link to this one. Zerbey 13:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Moved. BTW both phrases collect rather insignificant google hits. But "Soviet" is indeed a more correct one. `'Míkka 17:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

This is preposterous... the term "Soviet" is to "Russian" as "British" is to "English" so the two are informally interchangeable. This makes it so because before The Russian Empire was carved up, there were never recognied states as, say Kazakhstan or Ukraine before that. Anything "Soviet" can also be referred to as though Russia did it. All the other Former Soviet Republics exist today merely because of the fact that Lenin carved them out of the Russian Empire. Had Lenin not done so, Russia would still be in one piece as it should have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.210.9.36 (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Just as the Scots are British but are not keen to be called English, the Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Georgians, Azeris, Armenians, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Ukrainians, etc might object to having things they did or projects they contributed to referred to as solely "Russian". The Baltic States were independent countries at the time of the creation of the Soviet Union and at the time of Lenin's death.Bdell555 (talk) 20:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Race

I was casually reading the article and noticed, well, I jusnt didn't see any mention of it... What race were these dogs? Well, I know they were stary dogs, obviously not all of them were from a particular race but is there any information somewhere about this?.

Gender of the dogs

It appears that more than two thirds of the dogs were female. Is there any information on that possibly female dogs could take space voyage better than male ones? Or it is a casual coincidence? Garret Beaumain (talk) 18:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

The article addresses this in the section on Training. (sdsds - talk) 22:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

NOT THE FIRST ONES the first "earth-born" creatures in space were actually small flies (don't know it's name in english) sent to space in a rocket V2 in 1946. that's one thing, the other: "belka" actually doesn't mean "squirrel", the correct translation should be "the withe one". Funkygata —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.8.6.22 (talk) 10:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

NOT THE FIRST ONES

the first "earth-born" creatures in space were actually small flies (don't know it's name in english) sent to space in a rocket V2 in 1946. that's one thing, the other: "belka" actually doesn't mean "squirrel", the correct translation should be "the white one". Funkygata —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.8.6.22 (talk) 10:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Dates

This article says "Dezik (Дезик) and Tsygan (Цыган, "Gypsy") were the first dogs to make a sub-orbital flight on July 22, 1951", yet Animals in space says "On January 29, 1951, the Soviet Union launched the R-1 IIIA-1 flight, carrying the dogs Tsygan (Russian: Цыган, "Gypsy") and Dezik (Russian: Дезик) into space". Which is it? AMCKen (talk) 02:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Well spotted; the Siddiqi reference says July 22, 1951, so that's what we should go with. Mlm42 (talk) 19:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Belka and Strelka and the rabbit

On the flight carrying the two dogs, Belka and Strelka, the translation of 3 Russian-language webpages on the flight say that they sent live bone marrow cultures or cells of a rabbit (rather then a live rabbit) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ann Vole (talk • contribs) 17:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I know what happened to Belka. My ex girlfriends grand daddy Per-Emil Brusewitz was a swedish diplomat in Russia that time so he got the opportunity to take care of Belka and he took the spacedog to Sweden. So the dog lived happy in Sweden with his family and my ex Nadja Brusewitz told me that her grand daddy speaked only Russian to Belka. Interesting story of a man's best friend a space hero who lived happily ever after. I guess that my ex girlfriend Nadja Brusewitz still have that photo of her grand daddy with a bicycle and Belka sitting in the front in a basket. Eugene Laze aka Henry Ihander — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:7D0:83B6:580:7D89:3409:E5E9:7CF (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Laika TV

An anon IP is busy restoring the debunked claim that Laika had TV coverage, using a tiny NASA source. As usual, this is probably derived from the 2/5 numbering confusion. Can someone who is better equipped for sourcing of this please assist? I'm already engaged elsewhere with this same 4RR-persistent editor. Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Soviet space dogs. 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/20060108184335/http://www.dogsinthenews.com/issues/0211/articles/021103a.htm to http://dogsinthenews.com/issues/0211/articles/021103a.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:32, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Rymdhundarna Veterok och Ugoljok (16493301588).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Belka and Strelka merge proposal

It seems to me that Belka and Strelka doesn't have enough substantial information on its own to justify supporting a separate article. The article is a near-total repeat of the information already covered here, including details about their puppies. Much is also already present on Korabl-Sputnik 2. Its contents should be merged into this article. Marisauna (talk) 02:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

• Keep as is (honestly, my first thought, respectfully, was "you've got to be kidding"). These two dogs were the first animals to orbit the Earth and survive. Nobody had done that before. It's only going to be done once in history and this was it. The first to orbit the Earth and live to bark about it. Notability in a nutshell. The information is duplicated elsewhere because it accents and carries with it the notability of the achievement. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  I removed the information I found extraneous (descendants and popular culture). Given that their entry on this article stays short (see surrounding sections, especially Laika's, for precedent), I would now be fine to Keep. Marisauna (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  Hi Marisauna. Maybe a little longer? To explain a bit more about my "first thought" above, some background. I just found the Belka and Strelka page yesterday, was surprised it existed, and began to link it around and expand on it both here and at the other pages you mention. Then it was like "Hey!" - it was being suggested to delete (I see "merge" as delete, and have seen many good pages "merged" with little actually merged). What's maybe more important: information across the pages isn't alike. Was it 40 mice or 42 mice? A source on one of the pages says 40. Who was the puppy given to, John Kennedy, Jacqueline, or Caroline - all three are given the puppy as a gift within the various pages (including in the material you've deleted). Then there are interesting comments on this talk page above: was there a rabbit on the flight or just cells from the rabbit? Then a person who claims their relative kept one of the dogs is a good story, but doesn't look like anyone has replied to them asking for more information or a source. This topic seems very important, given Belka and Strelka's historical significance to the space age, and it'd be nice to get it right, well covered, and expanded (even if much is duplicated on several pages). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

  I concur with Randy. Too many officious people want to diminish the vailable information and put it all in a box. Half the fun of reading online is the search for more information that is not on just one page. Let people's curiosity know no bounds by not boxing everything into a single article. It would be like having a single conversation with somebody important and then never talking about that topic ever again to anyone else except by repeating verbatim that same conversation.

  Whilst WP/WM is a secondary source, it is never considered reliable by officail reliability standards such as universities. It is rarely quoted in genuine academic papers simply because it is considered unreliable, and this was the point of Wikipedia: to get the info out there of reasonable reliability standard but not the gold standard of original thought. God forbid article authors have an original thought or will need to be merged with the {Merged with page [trash:"Original Thought Detected"]} Ashattock (talk) 13:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Date of Dezik & Tsygan’s flight

There is an issue with the date given for Dezik & Tsygan’s flight in this article and the Dezik and Tsygan article. It is currently listed as August 15, 1951, presumably as this NASA reference gives this date. All other references I can find give a date of July 22, 1951, including space.com, Russian Life and Science Museum. In particular, Siddiqi on page 95 gives a date of July 22, 1951. I believe Siddiqi would be the most reliable, so will update with this reference in both articles Ilenart626 (talk) 10:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)