876:
472:
451:
560:
423:
1509:
292:
407:
482:
191:
364:
353:
342:
331:
250:
222:
708:
even kept the military budget from increasing). Any possible differences are more likely in the specific advocacy of military space technology, which is also more germain to this artical. I put a NPOV tag on the cold war section, I'd like it to stay there until some of this is addressed (again, I'll work on it a little tommarrow.)
860:
does (or will) have elements based in space - are they not what is needed. As for the V2, I suppose the fact that it was the 1st man-made object into space justifies its presence, but it did little (I would argue) for the militarisation of space other than set the bar for the next object to be thrown out of the atmosphere.
320:
1112:
The whole post-cold war "conservative vs. liberal" position section needs to go. It's factually incorrect (Bush Sr. did not support Star Wars or weaponization of space), totally unsupported (no presidential speeches have advanced either of these positions), and substantively tangential to the actual
1238:
Even with proper citations and references, this article would still need work. It should discuss the various kinds of weapons available for use in space (including EMP); it should include the full range of
Chinese intelligence gathering satellites in its list of spay satellites; and it should refer
859:
I would argue that pictures of missiles (ground-based interceptor, V2 & Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric
Projectile) are not suitable pictures for the "Militarisation of space". The ground-based interceptor and kill vehicle are parts of the missile defence programme but not space based. The programme
707:
military force (much closer to any published doctrine the advocating unilateral hegemonic dictatorship). Also, it seems plain incorrect to me to imply that any recent administration has made significant trade or treaty concessions, or significantly reduced military spending (I don't thing anyone's
1127:
I agree with your opinion that "terrorist organizations" should be removed from the paragrph. While I don't necessarily think that the whole section should go, I do think using terms such as conservative, energetically, liberal, mildly, etc. convey (or seem to convey) bias. Perhaps using something
1151:
The whole section should be scratched and the article should focus on current application. Missile
Defense System is being researched and built. GPS, reconnaissance satellites, navigation (both aerial and nautical), networking, and communication satellites are in practical use today. Who cares
844:
Those are very good points. Military technology is often passed into the commercial realm in order to recoup the significant investments corporations contribute to their development. Perhaps a section should be added to explain how the military currently exploits GPS, reconnaissance satellites,
800:
I know that, at least in the US, the civil space program (NASA) emerged from military research, and before that from German military space research (the scientists of which were brought to the US and started the
Redstone space program through project paperclip). Is that within the scope of this
1128:
like "one point of view", or something similar is better. The references to Bush Sr should be removed and other parts rewritten to remove phrases (unless there is supporting evidence) such "the most important way to do this...". If no one else takes a stab at it, I'll try a little later today.
1103:
I think this is inaccurate. Non-state terrorist actors cannot launch ICBMs. No one, that I know of, claims that a missile defense system will prevent terrorism. (If I'm wrong about this, please provide a reference.) I therefore think the change should be reverted. Comments? –
722:
As I noted, my attempt to fill this gap was very much a draft. I hope you will add your thoughts to the article and help fix the NPOV problem. I've done a rewrite, also, trying to stick to NPOV, but clearly much more work needs to be done on this colaboration. Rick
Norwood
430:
236:
693:
Clarification: "and as a result, the Treaty of
Versailles forbade solid fuel rocket research in Germany" - I have read the military section of the treaty, and it contains no references to rockets at all. I do not believe that the treaty banned solid rocket research.
769:* Defending against shorter-range missiles launched from hostile ships off US coasts would be feasible with interceptors similar to current Navy missiles, provided that the missile-carrying ships are able to stay within about 40 km of threatening ships.
688:
Good points, Jpbrenna. You should add them to the article. I've tried to continue the article beyond the end of the cold war, and tried to maintain a NPOV by giving both sides of the discussion. Clearly, more work needs to be done. Rick
Norwood
678:
was sent up (the first man-made object in space - tells you something about our species right there). Since the 1960's, outer space has been filled with military communications and spy satellites. It didn't all start with Ronald Reagan.
702:
It's too late right now, tommarrow I might do some of this myself. The conservative ("Regan, Bush, Bush") and
Liberal oppinion breakdowns here have a bias. A better aproach might be to introduce figures who defend the idea of an active
814:
technology, which started out as a military program, but is now open to all. Guiding your car to a Hotel, and a Bomb to a bunker using the same piece of technology. This would also be an apropriate topic for militization of space.
1521:
967:
are in the "see also" section, while a large chunk of text is dedicated to Star Wars (which isn't an offensive weapons system and hasn't ever been built?) And on a side topic, what about military communications satellites?
988:
Yea, it looks US-centric right now. Probably because the contributers have been primarily
American. Just gotta wait until other POVs weigh in. Recommend making whatever changes/additions you want without eliminating info. -
153:
627:
OK, I've worked on the Cold War section. What do you all think. There is still plenty of room for improvement. I would like to find out the first arms control treaty which used spy satellites as a monitering agent.
414:
232:
1564:
619:
Perhaps it would be a good idea to specify which authors were fantasizing about the militarization of space first? I would do it, but I don't know. That's the first thought that came to my mind when reading it.
1559:
870:
I'm not sure I agree. We need historical context, after all, and I wouldn't want to restrict the article to pictures of things which don't exist yet. Besides, we have some pretty darn cool pictures of ICBM
1152:
what liberal and conservative thought? That section of the article should focus on the application of the technology along with it’s strengths and weaknesses. Or that’s my vote for what it counts.--
1258:
The aforementioned section is currently a list of spy satellites. If possible, could someone write a textual introduction to such satellites? The list does not really belong in this article.
1013:
Only in
American spelling. Apparently the article was started by someone using British spelling, and Knowledge (XXG) policy is use the form of whoever starts the article unless it's like
959:
This article seems a bit lop-sided. Granted, a discussion of militarization of space is going to be naturally limited to a few nations, but how come the actually-built offensive weapons
825:
technology. Originally developed for military reconnaissance, Imaging satellite technology is now also available to civilians and scientists in conjunction with aeral photography through
1584:
911:
looking skyward and thinking "If I had some kind of enormous cannon orbiting the Earth in space, I could rain fire down on my enemies! Too bad I lack a suitable rocket booster." --
147:
1216:
1212:
305:
262:
1449:
1445:
1431:
1339:
1335:
1321:
291:
718:
It's also erroneous: Bush Sr. (and his NSA Brent Scowcroft) did not support Star Wars, and quietly dropped the project (much to the consternation of the Reaganites).
44:
538:
1554:
763:* A boost-phase defense could contribute to a layered defense, provided the second layer can handle the unpredictable debris generated by the boost-phase layer.
79:
1574:
528:
1549:
1544:
1529:
1178:(not GPS and GLONASS). Granted, its a dual-use technology which has become popular since the end of the cold war but that doesn't change its origin. -
1579:
638:
Also we should include how the military uses GPS, navigational, and weather satellites since these are the primary uses space militarisation today. --
504:
257:
227:
900:"For most of human history, regions outside Earth's atmosphere were not considered useful for military operations because they were inaccessible."
85:
1082:
Someone added some text into the following passage of the "Conservative Position" section. (Added text is in bold; struckthru text was removed.)
754:* Defending the 50 states against solid-propellant ICBMs from North Korea or Iran is unlikely to be practical when all factors are considered.
1569:
652:
contribution I'm not sure how to cite the sources. I promise I'll learn eventually. Anyway, here's my two cents and I hope it's helpful. --
266:
30:
495:
456:
1307:
1094:
inevitable, and that it is foolish not to use the current American hegemony to place the United States in an unassailable position to
168:
99:
1427:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1317:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1239:
to both the Chinese and US ASAT tests. It needs to discuss Soviet plans to arm Soyuz and Salyut space vehicles with 23mm cannons.
1034:
You can use -ize in British English as well, but -ise is more common. I suppose that more than 95% of British Wikipedians use -ise.
135:
104:
20:
74:
766:* Effective countermeasures against boost-phase-intercept missile defense are possible, and they should be taken into account.
674:
of space. Militarization is using space for any military purpose whatsoever, which has been happening since the first German
202:
1297:
65:
810:
Another Military technology which is currently extensively used by both civilians and military forces around the world is
1417:
129:
1492:
1382:
1219:
guidelines not met. With proper citations and references, this article would easily qualify as B class or higher. --
1065:
1018:
601:
597:
845:
communication and networking satellites, in today's battlefields? Maybe between Post Cold War and Space Treaties?--
125:
109:
728:
1448:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1338:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
175:
208:
1483:
1409:
1401:
1373:
1289:
1281:
1244:
757:* Defending only the West Coast against ICBMs from North Korea would be easier than defending all 50 states.
261:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
24:
648:
I also added a Sources section so we can start keeping tabs on that. Since this is my first (what I deem)
1405:
744:
may be feasible, but would push the limits of what is possible physically, technically, and operationally.
760:* Defending only part of the US against ICBMs from Iran would not be easier than defending all 50 states.
605:
55:
1467:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1455:
1357:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1345:
1240:
503:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1408:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1288:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
70:
1166:
Just a heads up, satellite navigation was a cold war (not post-cold war) development, and began with
141:
190:
1525:
1308:
https://web.archive.org/web/20040815133801/http://www.k26.com/buran/Info/Polyus/polyus-energia.html
1263:
1224:
1183:
1087:
The conservative view, energetically put into action by Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Bush, is that
880:
802:
709:
161:
1512:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
1117:
1114:
487:
1452:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1342:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1468:
1358:
1129:
964:
875:
51:
1475:
1365:
731:'s report on boost-phase missile defence. The bullet-point breakdown follows, and I quote:
1153:
1047:
1022:
1004:
979:
969:
935:
884:
846:
826:
653:
639:
629:
621:
568:
1298:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090601040059/http://www.russianspaceweb.com/almaz_ops2.html
1434:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1324:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1311:
1259:
1220:
1179:
775:
471:
450:
1474:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1441:
1418:
https://web.archive.org/web/20131922172000/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/polyus.htm
1364:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1331:
559:
1538:
1014:
822:
680:
1017:
where the choice of spelling should depend on topic. There's something on it in the
1497:
1387:
1267:
1248:
1228:
1200:
1197:
1186:
1156:
1142:
1132:
1120:
1105:
1072:
1059:
1050:
1038:
1025:
1007:
993:
990:
982:
972:
948:
938:
926:
915:
864:
849:
830:
805:
789:
786:
712:
683:
656:
642:
632:
1301:
1092:
attacks against the United States by rogue nations or terrorist organizations are
1508:
861:
838:
816:
741:
500:
422:
1440:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1421:
1330:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1069:
1056:
1035:
888:
477:
945:
912:
675:
596:) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
406:
1175:
1167:
978:
your right please feel free to add those sections on Russian systems.--
908:
834:
925:
of it. They just didn't have any way of doing anything about it. –
903:
I'm not certain regions outside Earth's atmosphere were considered
249:
221:
1193:
1171:
874:
1055:
This is a bit jarring .... maybe change it later? maybe not ...
960:
748:
737:
670:
of space; putting purely defensive ones in would I guess be the
921:
I dunno. Early myths (like Sodom and Gemorrah) indicate people
883:
missile, each one of which can carry 10 independently targeted
747:* Defending the 50 states against liquid-propellant ICBMs from
811:
554:
184:
15:
1207:
WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
1066:
Knowledge (XXG):Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English
1565:
Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
421:
405:
290:
1003:
Shouln't there be a "z" instead of an "s" in the title? --
1412:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1292:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1560:
C-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
796:
Military as the roots of the non-military space programs
1285:
160:
1312:
http://k26.com/buran/Info/Polyus/polyus-energia.html
736:* Defending the 50 states against liquid-propellant
499:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
303:
This article has been checked against the following
1444:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1334:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
431:
Military science, technology, and theory task force
388:
302:
174:
1585:Knowledge (XXG) articles that use British English
1192:I had no idea satellite navigation began with a
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1211:Article reassessed and graded as start class.
1430:This message was posted before February 2018.
1320:This message was posted before February 2018.
1302:http://www.russianspaceweb.com/almaz_ops2.html
8:
275:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Military history
1503:Wiki Education assignment: Cold War Science
1422:http://www.astronautix.com/craft/polyus.htm
1400:I have just modified one external link on
887:along trajectories outside of the Earth's
572:, which has its own spelling conventions (
445:
385:
299:
216:
1280:I have just modified 2 external links on
1064:Found the thing you mentioned though ...
255:This article is within the scope of the
934:I rewrote the history intro. Better?--
513:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Spaceflight
447:
218:
188:
265:. To use this banner, please see the
1555:Military aviation task force articles
1254:Improvement of Spy satellites section
907:before the 20th century. I can't see
604:, this should not be changed without
278:Template:WikiProject Military history
7:
493:This article is within the scope of
1575:Mid-importance spaceflight articles
1196:. Sorry, I couldn't help myself. ~
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1550:C-Class military aviation articles
1517:
1513:
14:
1545:C-Class military history articles
1404:. Please take a moment to review
1284:. Please take a moment to review
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
1580:WikiProject Spaceflight articles
1520:. Further details are available
1507:
1141:Looks challenging. Good luck! –
558:
516:Template:WikiProject Spaceflight
480:
470:
449:
362:
351:
340:
329:
318:
248:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
751:would be much more challenging.
533:This article has been rated as
1:
1498:06:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
1108:17:54, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
1039:22:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
944:Ah, nicely done. Good job. --
727:A good resource might be the
507:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1570:C-Class spaceflight articles
1268:04:42, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1145:19:43, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
1113:topic as currently written.
994:21:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
929:19:53, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
415:Military aviation task force
258:Military history WikiProject
1217:appropriate inline citation
1157:23:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
1133:19:35, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
1121:18:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
1051:00:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
1026:11:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
1008:06:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
983:06:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
973:05:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
949:00:43, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
939:06:33, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
916:16:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
865:18:06, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
850:05:38, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
806:10:26, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
790:22:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
713:10:26, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
657:06:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
643:06:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
633:06:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
1601:
1461:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1397:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1351:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1277:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1201:23:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
1187:19:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
684:03:07, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
539:project's importance scale
323:Referencing and citation:
1388:22:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
1249:00:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
1078:The conservative position
729:American Physical Society
532:
465:
429:
413:
384:
281:military history articles
243:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1229:20:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
1096:counter such attacks and
1073:17:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
1060:17:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
698:NPOV in cold war section
1402:Militarisation of space
1393:External links modified
1282:Militarisation of space
1273:External links modified
496:WikiProject Spaceflight
389:Associated task forces:
334:Coverage and accuracy:
25:Militarisation of space
892:
426:
410:
367:Supporting materials:
295:
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1524:. Student editor(s):
878:
425:
409:
294:
201:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
100:Neutral point of view
1442:regular verification
1332:regular verification
1162:Satellite navigation
602:relevant style guide
598:varieties of English
519:spaceflight articles
105:No original research
1432:After February 2018
1322:After February 2018
881:LG-118A Peacekeeper
821:Another example is
600:. According to the
356:Grammar and style:
309:for B-class status:
1522:on the course page
1486:InternetArchiveBot
1437:InternetArchiveBot
1376:InternetArchiveBot
1327:InternetArchiveBot
893:
488:Spaceflight portal
427:
411:
296:
263:list of open tasks
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1462:
1352:
965:Polyus spacecraft
612:
611:
553:
552:
549:
548:
545:
544:
444:
443:
440:
439:
436:
435:
380:
379:
325:criterion not met
267:full instructions
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1592:
1530:article contribs
1519:
1515:
1511:
1496:
1487:
1460:
1459:
1438:
1386:
1377:
1350:
1349:
1328:
1098:win future wars.
885:nuclear warheads
666:in space is the
565:This article is
562:
555:
521:
520:
517:
514:
511:
490:
485:
484:
483:
474:
467:
466:
461:
453:
446:
396:
386:
370:
366:
365:
359:
355:
354:
348:
344:
343:
337:
333:
332:
326:
322:
321:
300:
283:
282:
279:
276:
273:
272:Military history
252:
245:
244:
239:
228:Military history
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1600:
1599:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1535:
1534:
1514:18 January 2022
1505:
1490:
1485:
1453:
1446:have permission
1436:
1410:this simple FaQ
1395:
1380:
1375:
1343:
1336:have permission
1326:
1290:this simple FaQ
1275:
1256:
1236:
1209:
1164:
1080:
1019:Manual of style
1001:
957:
898:
857:
827:TerraServer-USA
798:
700:
617:
606:broad consensus
569:British English
518:
515:
512:
509:
508:
486:
481:
479:
459:
394:
368:
363:
357:
352:
346:
341:
335:
330:
324:
319:
280:
277:
274:
271:
270:
230:
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1598:
1596:
1588:
1587:
1582:
1577:
1572:
1567:
1562:
1557:
1552:
1547:
1537:
1536:
1526:Birdlawyer2000
1504:
1501:
1480:
1479:
1472:
1425:
1424:
1416:Added archive
1394:
1391:
1370:
1369:
1362:
1315:
1314:
1306:Added archive
1304:
1296:Added archive
1274:
1271:
1255:
1252:
1235:
1234:Tag and Assess
1232:
1208:
1205:
1204:
1203:
1163:
1160:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1136:
1135:
1124:
1123:
1101:
1100:
1079:
1076:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1029:
1028:
1000:
999:Militarization
997:
987:
977:
956:
953:
952:
951:
933:
931:
930:
897:
894:
873:
872:
856:
853:
843:
803:Themissinglint
797:
794:
793:
792:
783:
782:
777:Physics Today,
771:
770:
767:
764:
761:
758:
755:
752:
745:
733:
732:
720:
719:
710:Themissinglint
699:
696:
691:
660:
647:
637:
626:
616:
615:Talking Points
613:
610:
609:
563:
551:
550:
547:
546:
543:
542:
535:Mid-importance
531:
525:
524:
522:
505:the discussion
492:
491:
475:
463:
462:
460:Mid‑importance
454:
442:
441:
438:
437:
434:
433:
428:
418:
417:
412:
402:
401:
399:
397:
391:
390:
382:
381:
378:
377:
375:
373:
372:
371:
360:
349:
338:
327:
313:
312:
310:
297:
287:
286:
284:
253:
241:
240:
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1597:
1586:
1583:
1581:
1578:
1576:
1573:
1571:
1568:
1566:
1563:
1561:
1558:
1556:
1553:
1551:
1548:
1546:
1543:
1542:
1540:
1533:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1510:
1502:
1500:
1499:
1494:
1489:
1488:
1477:
1473:
1470:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1457:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1433:
1428:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1398:
1392:
1390:
1389:
1384:
1379:
1378:
1367:
1363:
1360:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1347:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1323:
1318:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1278:
1272:
1270:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1253:
1251:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1241:PorkchopLarue
1233:
1231:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1206:
1202:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1169:
1161:
1159:
1158:
1155:
1144:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1134:
1131:
1126:
1125:
1122:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1107:
1099:
1097:
1093:
1090:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1077:
1075:
1074:
1071:
1070:J. D. Redding
1067:
1062:
1061:
1058:
1057:J. D. Redding
1053:
1052:
1049:
1040:
1037:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1015:United States
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1006:
998:
996:
995:
992:
985:
984:
981:
975:
974:
971:
966:
962:
955:U.S.-centric?
954:
950:
947:
943:
942:
941:
940:
937:
928:
924:
920:
919:
918:
917:
914:
910:
906:
901:
895:
890:
886:
882:
877:
869:
868:
867:
866:
863:
854:
852:
851:
848:
841:
840:
836:
832:
828:
824:
823:Spy satellite
819:
818:
813:
808:
807:
804:
795:
791:
788:
785:
784:
780:
778:
773:
772:
768:
765:
762:
759:
756:
753:
750:
746:
743:
739:
735:
734:
730:
726:
725:
724:
717:
716:
715:
714:
711:
706:
697:
695:
690:
686:
685:
682:
677:
673:
672:fortification
669:
668:weaponization
665:
659:
658:
655:
651:
645:
644:
641:
635:
634:
631:
624:
623:
614:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
570:
564:
561:
557:
556:
540:
536:
530:
527:
526:
523:
506:
502:
498:
497:
489:
478:
476:
473:
469:
468:
464:
458:
455:
452:
448:
432:
424:
420:
419:
416:
408:
404:
403:
400:
398:
393:
392:
387:
383:
376:
374:
369:criterion met
361:
358:criterion met
350:
347:criterion met
339:
336:criterion met
328:
317:
316:
315:
314:
311:
308:
307:
301:
298:
293:
289:
288:
285:
268:
264:
260:
259:
254:
251:
247:
246:
242:
238:
234:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1506:
1484:
1481:
1456:source check
1435:
1429:
1426:
1399:
1396:
1374:
1371:
1346:source check
1325:
1319:
1316:
1279:
1276:
1257:
1237:
1210:
1165:
1150:
1102:
1095:
1091:
1088:
1086:
1081:
1063:
1054:
1045:
1002:
986:
976:
958:
932:
922:
904:
902:
899:
879:Test of the
858:
842:
837:satellite. ~
831:Google Earth
820:
809:
799:
779:January 2004
776:
774:Quoted from
721:
704:
701:
692:
687:
671:
667:
663:
661:
649:
646:
636:
625:
618:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
566:
534:
494:
304:
256:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1213:Referencing
871:technology.
742:North Korea
567:written in
510:Spaceflight
501:spaceflight
457:Spaceflight
345:Structure:
148:free images
31:not a forum
1539:Categories
1518:6 May 2022
1493:Report bug
1383:Report bug
1023:Isomorphic
970:Isomorphic
889:atmosphere
622:brianh6630
237:Technology
1476:this tool
1469:this tool
1366:this tool
1359:this tool
1260:MopSeeker
1221:dashiellx
1180:Davandron
1046:Thanks --
676:V2 rocket
578:travelled
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1482:Cheers.—
1372:Cheers.—
1194:titmouse
963:and the
801:artical?
705:deterent
681:Jpbrenna
662:Placing
590:artefact
306:criteria
233:Aviation
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1406:my edit
1286:my edit
1198:Rollo44
1176:Tsikada
1168:Transit
1143:Quadell
1106:Quadell
991:Rollo44
927:Quadell
923:thought
909:Sun Tzu
787:Anville
664:weapons
594:analyse
586:defence
537:on the
199:C-class
154:WP refs
142:scholar
1118:thames
1089:war is
905:at all
862:Mark83
855:Images
835:IKONOS
833:, and
582:centre
574:colour
205:scale.
126:Google
1172:Parus
1154:Brian
1048:Brian
1036:SpNeo
1005:Brian
980:Brian
936:Brian
896:Intro
847:Brian
839:James
817:James
740:from
738:ICBMs
654:Brian
650:major
640:Brian
630:Brian
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1516:and
1264:talk
1245:talk
1225:talk
1215:and
1184:Talk
1170:and
1068:...
961:FOBS
946:Sum0
913:Sum0
749:Iran
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1532:).
1450:RfC
1420:to
1340:RfC
1310:to
1300:to
1130:sgb
812:GPS
529:Mid
176:TWL
1541::
1463:.
1458:}}
1454:{{
1353:.
1348:}}
1344:{{
1266:)
1247:)
1227:)
1182:|
1174:/
829:,
679:--
628:--
592:,
588:,
584:,
580:,
576:,
395:/
235:/
231::
156:)
54:;
1528:(
1495:)
1491:(
1478:.
1471:.
1385:)
1381:(
1368:.
1361:.
1262:(
1243:(
1223:(
1116:—
1021:.
891:.
815:~
781:.
608:.
541:.
269:.
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
