Because of the nature of such projects, the most authoritative sources (any involved
governments and
defense contractors) may not even acknowledge its existence. The most reliable sources may be highly speculative.
This article is within the scope of the
Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of
open tasks and
task forces. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
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
OTV-2'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.
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⚡17:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Rename
What exactly is the rationale for the move here?
WP:COMMONNAME makes clear that if there is a more commonly used variant then it is preferred over official/technical versions. Besides, USA-226 is just one of a few "official names" for this vehicle.
ChiZeroOne (
talk)
17:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I wasn't involved in the rename. However, I will say that for multi-use reusable space vehicles, it is typical to have a WP article for the specific mission (in this case, USA-226) AND also the vehicle itself (OTV-2). Since USA-226 is the first flight of the vehicle, it is arguable which way to go right now, or whether it would yet justify two articles. However, as time passes, I expect it will be vehicle article and mission1 article, mission2 article. ... missionn article—just like we do for
Space Shuttle Discovery and also
STS-41-D,
STS-51-D,
STS-26,
STS-51-L,
STS-31,
STS-60,
STS-95, etc., etc.
So to me, the only question is multiple articles now, or later, after the second flight of OTV-1. In the meantime, OTV-1 could redirect to USA-226 or vice versa, I'm agnostic on which way is best. Cheers.
N2e (
talk)
18:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)reply
I would suggest we use the same solution as we did with OTV-1; make the OTV page a disambiguation between the vehicle (
Boeing X-37) and the flight (
USA-212/226), until such a time as there is enough information available to create an article on the individual spacecraft themselves. I have set up a disambiguation page at
X-37B OTV-2. Per the precedent set with most other military spacecraft, USA-226 would be the correct title for this article. --GW…12:16, 10 March 2011 (UTC)reply