Template talk:Space stations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Station image in template
I'd like to suggest that the image in the template is changed to that of Mir - whilst the ISS is the current station in orbit, we have images of the complete Mir station, whereas the ISS changes on a fairly regular basis, and so far is not complete. Colds7ream (talk) 16:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- That makes sense, but to me it is more important to use a representative of current events, rather than one that was deorbited many years ago, even if it is shown complete. I would suggest to wait a week, and if no one else voices a concern, go ahead and re-add the image. Thanks for your explanation! — Huntster (talk • email • contribs) 17:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Alternative layout
Hi. Something bugged me abbout this template and then I realized it was the mix of national-international and private projects that leads to the Developmental group's subgrouping. Any thoughts about a layout like the below?
|
||||||||||||
Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- In theory I like it, though there is way too much whitespace and just a bit too monochromatic altogether. If you don't mind, I'd like to play around with your proposal a bit when I have a moment. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 08:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thanks, I'd appreciate that. It's my thinking about the template too. Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistency
why are all the Salyut stations listed as `Salyut', while Genesis, is Genesis 1, and II??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.100.185 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 31 May 2008
- Because the Salyut program has its own topic page which covers the entire program, providing links to each one. There are only two Genesis craft, so no real point in having a "program" page for them. Salyut, by benefit of being the larger program, can accomplish things more efficiently. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 07:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
