Spaceflight: Timeline of spaceflight Template‑class

This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This template is supported by the timeline of spaceflight working group.

Rocketry Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry 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.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I've just reverted a major change to the template's format by an IP editor (the same IP who's edit warring has led to the protection of ((Launching))). There is a discussion of the matter ongoing at WT:SPACEFLIGHT which is yet to find consensus, so per WP:BRD the status quo should be maintained until a decision is made. --W. D. Graham 12:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Your personal opinion is not "consensus". And your opinion in minority (2 vs 1). From WT:SPACEFLIGHT discussion: "breaking into months is fantastic and increases reader comprehension." 37.54.108.158 (talk) 20:22, 24 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  With respect, I never said that it was. But your opinion, which you have already stated is the reason that you made this change, is not consensus either and until such time as a consensus emerges it should remain in the same format as the ~60 other templates in this series - maintaining the status quo. Wikipedia works on a principle of discussion and consensus building, not majority voting. You have made absolutely no effort whatsoever to engage in discussion, you just stated your opinion, waited a few days and declared yourself the "winner", cherry-picking a couple of quotes to support your position. I think your conduct so far, both here and on Template:Launching - where you only began discussion on the matter after Redrose64 (talk · contribs) removed your ability to edit the page - has been completely unacceptable. If we are going to resolve this issue we need to be able to have a civilised discussion, in a central location, and find a solution which is best for all parties and which can be applied to all templates. As a prerequisite of this we should put things back how they were and agree not to make changes without a genuine consensus. --W. D. Graham 21:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As with Template talk:Launching, I've imposed a one-month semi-protection, because changes should be discussed before being applied. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]