Talk:Disabled U.S. spy satellite to fall to Earth

Misleading?

I think that this article contains a large number of inaccuracies, and opinions/speculation being presented as facts:

• "The satellite is suspected to be one which was launched in December 2006" - this is pure speculation.
• "The satellite weighs approximately 10 tons" - this was a guess made by an uninformed source, see this report.
• "some fragments will likely survive re-entry" - it is not clear whether this is likely or not.
  

This article needs substantial cleanup. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a wiki; if you feel something needs fixin', go right ahead and do it yourself ;-) --Boricuæddie 21:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking more along the lines of FUBAR --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

If you think the article's that bad, Wikinews:Deletion requests is always open. --Boricuæddie 21:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm not sure. I'll try to fix it, but I'm not really sure if it will be usable. I was hoping to get opinions from more experienced editors. I'll have a poke around with it, and if I cannot get it fixed, then I will nominate it for deletion. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to keep working on it, but I'm curious about the removal of Category:Disasters and accidents. Presumably a satelite being destroyed is an accident, as no-one would suggest this is deliberate? Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 21:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• No, it's just looking at most of the articles in that category, they all seem to involve danger to, or loss of, human life. Therefor, I felt that the presence of the category may mislead people into believing that the satellite is going to endanger life. If somebody gets killed by this (which is very unlikely), then feel free to re-add the category. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 21:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay. I've improved it, and removed the tag. It's not perfect, but it is an improvement. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 22:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Boricuæddie 22:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced information

This article contains a great deal of unsourced information, particularly in the final paragraph. --SVTCobra 23:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I've added two more sources which cover most of the unsourced content. --GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 23:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)