Talk:Malligyong-1
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Lazaro Fernandes in topic Manligyong v. Manligyoeng
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 | An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the Main Page in the "In the news" section. You can visit the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from reliable news sources to include recent events. Notice date: 22 November 2023. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with Template:ITN talk if appropriate. |
Proposed merge of Chollima-1 with Malligyong-1 edit
Both have large portions of overlapping information and are quite small. ✶Mitch199811✶ 23:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
- Merge. I think you're right; both articles are stubs and closely related to each other, so we may as well combine them. Spaceeditor123 (talk) 03:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Merge for now, though we should keep an eye on the articles for a potential future re-split when they get more content. DeemDeem52 (talk) 16:22, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Wait for now, as DPRK claims it wail launch maybe Malligyong-1 Unit 2 (see also Kwangmyŏngsŏng-3 Unit 2) soon —Mykhal (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose. The articles have different subjects. One article is about a satellite, the other is about a rocket. The articles are similar at the moment because they haven't been expanded and are mostly covering one launch (which happens to be of that satellite on that rocket). Over time I would expect the rocket article to be expanded with more details about the rocket that are not relevant to the satellite (e.g. its technical characteristics, future launches, etc), while the satellite's article would focus on aspects of the mission not relevant to the rocket (e.g. its own technical characteristics, planned uses, construction, etc). Merging the articles without giving them a chance to expand just ensures they never will, and will result in a mess of an article trying to cover multiple subjects if we're going to try and clump every detail of every payload into one place. 2A02:C7F:2CC5:5A00:E893:4891:C26F:9ED5 (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment If a merge does occur, which will be the primary article? Has this happened before with other satellite and launch vehicle articles being merged? -boldblazer 22:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. From the point of view of spaceflight pages and activities, having a page referring both to a launch vehicle and a payload is an anomaly and could cause cross-referencing problems in the future. I think it would be a wiser choice to keep them separate and eventually expand them in different directions according to the launch vehicle/payload templates once new information will be made available.--Fm3dici97 (talk) 09:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose, because we should keep mission articles separate from their launch vehicle. As other editors mentioned, I'm of with waiting for now too. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Manligyong v. Manligyoeng edit
@Lazaro Fernandes, can you explain why you changed the title of the article? ✶Mitch199811✶ 01:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- The satellite's real name is Manligyoeng and not Manligyong according to official launch sources Lazaro Fernandes (talk) 02:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)