Spaceflight List‑class Low‑importance

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 List This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

User Amigao has used multiple reverts to remove the CCP/Global Times's response to US/Western accusations of space militarization. User cites the general unreliability of Global Times to present factual information but does not state why WP:SELFSOURCE does not apply.

WP:SELFSOURCE states:

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as the following criteria are met:

The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.

It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).

It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.

There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.

The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources.

I kindly request User:Amigao explain how "this use of a deprecated source goes far beyond WP:ABOUTSELF" when using CGTN as a source for CGTN claims. This exact issue has been corrected before: Amigao source removals. RightQuark (talk) 19:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RightQuark, your citation of a deprecated source like WP:GLOBALTIMES fails the second bullet point of WP:SELFSOURCE: "It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities)." One cannot use a deprecated source for an editorial opinion about a third party. - Amigao (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "Jilin-1 Gaofen" satellites are unrelated to the Gaofen program. Gaofen means "high resolution" in Chinese so they are just the high-resolution part of the Jilin-1 system, not part of the government-operated Gaofen series. Including the in the list of Gaofen satellites just because of the similarity of their names is incorrect. 2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:CCCA:6738:EDA:95B2 (talk) 13:48, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good catch! Wonder who decided to name a series of satellites "high resolution" and didn't foresee such confusion. I'll pull the Jilin information from this page and establish a separate article, hopefully soon. Feel free to call out any other issues you may see. Cheers! RightQuark (talk) 20:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]