Talk:BA 2100

Article needs a photo

This article would clearly benefit from a photograph of the model built for and shown at the recent (October 2010) International Symposium for Personal and Commercial Spaceflight (ISPCS) in New Mexico. Did anyone take a photo that they would be willing to release to Wikimedia under a commons license? N2e (talk) 20:29, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I found a photo on Flickr, using the image-finding tool suggested by the {{reqphoto}} template, and have loaded it into Wikimedia. Give it a few days for someone to complete the image license review and I suspect we will have a photo that may be used on this page. N2e (talk) 01:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

N2e, I wanted to give you a heads up, but that image will have to be deleted off Commons. Just because the photographer licensed it on Flickr, doesn't mean he has the right to license it. The model, which is the focus on the image, is a copyrighted sculpture, thus the image is a derivative. U.S. law protects such things (just like you cannot take a freely-licensed photo of a modern sculpture in a museum). You may want to request deletion yourself, rather than have someone else do it. Up to you. If a photo is to be included in the article, it will have to be used under fair-use restrictions, since it is not possible to obtain a free image at this time. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess I'll never really understand the Wiki-photo policy. That's why I have generally deferred photo- and image-related article stuff to guys like you who have worked enough in the area to become facile with the rules and ins and outs. In this case, I started merely to note that a photo was needed for the article. Then, a couple of days later, I saw the little link in the reqphoto template box and thought, cool, maybe someone took a photo of the thing and licensed there photo to Flickr using a Wiki-compliant license. But I guess that's not enough. That's why I stay out of the photo/image part of Wikipedia.

So like with everything else on Wikipedia, I will just relax, and let the result emerge as a spontaneous order in the great socialsphere of Wikipedia. Cheers. N2e (talk) 13:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the licensing issues are very complex and, well, frustrating, even to those who have a grasp on it. Once I can deal with it, I'll simply nominate for deletion at Commons and reupload here at en.wiki. There's no reason why it can't still be used...it simply can't be used under a free license because it is a copyrighted object. — Huntster (t @ c) 15:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Bigelow BA-2100 expandable space module.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bigelow BA-2100 expandable space module.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 23 March 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Bigelow BA-2100 expandable space module.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:08, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Needs work

This article is titled BA 2100. The first sentence starts out, "...is a conceptual design for a larger, heavier, and more capable expandable space station module, or interplanetary human transport module." There needs to be some rewording and either some redundant information from the other articles or these articles merged. Otr500 (talk) 21:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Rename to B2100?

Should this article be renamed to B2100 to match the new name for the B330? Quadrplax (talk) 15:21, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. Is it actually being referred to as "B2100" anywhere? Bigelow's own website refers to it as Olympus rather than BA 2100 apparently. I'd leave it alone for now until and unless more evidence of "B2100" being used comes about. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:37, 1 June 2017 (UTC)