Talk:Falcon XX

Is Falcon XX truly a "proposed spaceflight launch system"?

Based on a news source that has clarified SpaceX intentions, or rather, non-intentions, with the Falcon XX today (10 Aug 2010), I believe we ought to initiate a discussion as to whether or not this topic is really sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article as things currently stand. I'll say why in the next paragraph. But do note, I am not yet making a proposal for deletion, nor nominating the article for AfD, I just think all editors need to step back and consider whether the sources really support all the current assertions in the article and whether or not such assertions about the plans of SpaceX, if verified/verifiable, are notable at this point in time.

I do think the information published today (2010-08-10) at this news source, and the accompanying Spacevidcast video of a recent interview with Elon Musk, may offer a compelling reason for not (yet) having a SpaceX Falcon XX article in Wikipedia. According to that source, "Elon emphasizes that the SpaceX heavy lift slides shown at the recent propulsion conference are just rough concepts and not part of any grand long term plan." IF that is true, appropriately verified to WP:V standards, etc., THEN I would think it calls into question the entire basis for this article, at least at this point in time. I am most interested in what others think on this matter. Cheers. N2e (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Any opinions from the editors following this page? Otherwise I may propose the article for AfD to get input from the broader wiki-community. With the stories now published in major media (including Aviation Week) showing that Musk and SpaceX currently have no formal plans for either a Falcon X or Falcon XX, and that both rockets are mere concepts, I don't believe a consensus will be able to successfully argue that we need the two recently-created new Wikipedia articles on the (now) purely speculative future heavy-lift rockets. Cheers. N2e (talk) 13:11, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I think this article is important. Since there's been a lot of buzz about the Falcon XX in the industry recently, let's keep this page as a reference point unless it becomes clear that Falcon XX is purely vapourware. However, this article does need to be updated with the partial walk-back mentioned in Aviation Week. NeilFraser (talk) 07:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for offering an opinion Neil! I was hoping for a more active discussion with multiple editors. I'm going to go ahead and nominate the article for AfD in order to get a wider set of eyes on the issue. I'm interested in space progress and the progress in NewSpace, I just really cannot see two new WP articles (this one on Falcon XX and Falcon X) on what is explicitly, in the words of the company, merely rough concepts thrown out at a rocket propulsion conference. N2e (talk) 14:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination

The following is the result of the AfD process.

This article was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 11 September 2010 with a consensus to merge the content into the article SpaceX. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use the destination article's talk page.

Full disclosure: I nominated the article for deletion, but did not "close" the discussion. Just adding the closure info to this Talk page for all interested editors to see. N2e (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Considering that Falcon X is up on AfD now and likely to have the same outcome as Falcon XX I'd suggest holding off on the merge for a couple of days as it should be easier to merge everything at once instead of pulling in XX and a couple of days later adding in X. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, very true. And that is what has, in the event, occurred. Both Falcon XX (this article) and Falcon X AfD proposals were closed with the consensus as "merge." As of 2010-09-20, Falcon X has been merged to SpaceX already. The merge for this article is yet to be completed. N2e (talk) 19:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the text from this article can be directly dropped into a Falcon XX section in SpaceX. The table can also come over as it includes both the X and XX models. With that done this article can be changed to a redirect. One recommendation here, the redirect should be to the Falcon XX section of the SpaceX article. I tweaked the Falcon X redirect to perform the same. If you don't want to handle the content move I can do it in a little while. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and did the merge. Of course, plenty of cleanup can be done with the text that was taken over. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 16:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks StuffOfInterest! N2e (talk) 17:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)