- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Issues raised were not addressed in the stated time frame—no edits to article by nominator since June 7—closing as unsuccessful
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
RLV-TD edit
- ...that RLV-TD (pictured) is India’s first unmanned, TSTO, hypersonic, reusable launch vehicle, and the prototype's test flight was successful on 23 May 2016?
- ALT1:...that RLV-TD (pictured) is India’s first reusable launch vehicle, and is projected to reduce the cost of payload delivery to low Earth orbit by 80% from $20,000 per kg?
Created by AKS.9955 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC).
- I believe your proposed hooks are hyping this vehicle. I don't think it's accurate to call it "India's first reusable launch vehicle" when it is no such thing yet, only a demonstrator which just made its first test. I'm also concerned about your ALT1's use of "is projected to bring down the cost". That is the goal, but there is no guarantee that projections will be obtained. (That certainly wasn't the case for the US Space Shuttle.) How about:
- ALT2::...that RLV-TD (pictured) is a test demonstrator for India’s first reusable launch vehicle, which was first successfully flight tested on 23 May 2016, and is hoped to reduce the cost of payload delivery to low Earth orbit by 80% from $20,000 per kg? JustinTime55 (talk) 19:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello JustinTime55, thanks for your time. Sorry if it came across that way, but I am not in the business of promoting anything and in first hook I had used the word "prototype". ISRO (India's space program) is known for low cost operations. ISRO's mission to Mars costed less than the movie Gravity and 90% less that NASA's mission to Mars. Also, I have not used my conclusions and those are official statements by the agency. In anycase, I am ok with the hook you suggested. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:11, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
- OK. My intent was not to accuse you of promoting or having a conflict of interest. I just put that wikilink to "promotion" just to define the word hype, which is an American idiom I thought you might not be familiar with. It's often used informally to mean making something sound like more than it is, and not necessarily literal advertising promotion. Sorry it came across that way. JustinTime55 (talk) 12:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello JustinTime55, I was just clarifying and not saying that you were accusing me. I think we both got our words a bit mixed up; apologies. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:04, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: Image is up for deletion at commons. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits}, I have removed the picture from the article. Can I go ahead and remove the picture from the DYK nomination or will the reviewer do it? Please let me know. Thanks, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 13:20, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Discussion on this article's talk page shows an NPOV controversy about this article's focus. JustinTime55 (talk) 12:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello BlueMoonset, will address this in a day or two. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 15:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- AKS.9955, it's been more than a day or two, and you've been quite active elsewhere. This will be closed in 48 hours unless you have made significant progress in addressing these issues. Thank you for your understanding. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)