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
This article 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Obviously, this article needs a bit of work. As I see it, we need two things: sections within the list, and inclusion criteria.
On sectioning, I believe that we would do well initially in making two sections: Proposed systems, and systems that actually made it to production.
On inclusion criteria, I recommend that we limit it to launch systems that have articles. Some proposed launch systems simply aren't notable. So they don't get included here.
So there you go, I suppose. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should differentiate between systems that were proposed but cancelled/not developed, and systems that are still under development. I also think that whether or not a system has an article is a very bad inclusion criteria, since there are reasons other than notability that a topic may not have an article, and notability for list inclusion is generally held to be far below notability for having an article of its own. --GW… 12:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with GW. And, yes, this article really needs a lot of work. N2e (talk) 13:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
About this page: Started as Launch vehicle plans, moved to Space launch systems, moved to Space launch system designs. Includes merged material from Comparison of orbital launch systems. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fotaun (talk • contribs) 15:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC) [reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
List of launch vehicle designs → ? – The current name is misleading, as the article only includes designs that were either canceled or never left the drawing board. The new name should be "List of canceled launch vehicle designs" or "List of proposed and canceled launch vehicles" or something like that. Let's discuss which one is better. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 13:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the list should be moved. I prefer the first of your proposals. BegbertBiggs (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Done --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 15:02, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
