Content deleted Content added
→Discussion: Reply |
→Discussion: Reply |
||
Line 813:
::Yes, but the infobox measures launch success. Not mission success.
::Mission success can be listed on the IFT-3 article. [[User:Redacted II|Redacted II]] ([[User talk:Redacted II|talk]]) 12:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
:::So you say, with no evidence, again and again. – [[User:Jadebenn|Jadebenn]] <small>([[User talk:Jadebenn|talk]] <b>·</b> [[Special:Contributions/Jadebenn|contribs]] <b>·</b> [[Special:PrefixIndex/User:Jadebenn|subpages]])</small> 15:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
:I still am not of the mind that "success" is an accurate judgment of IFT-3's launch, and it remains inconsistent with that of other launch vehicles ("intended trajectory" has not been the only criteria for success for other vehicles. Payload fairing/door failures or loss of attitude control have been grounds for partial failure, both of which occurred on IFT-3).
:''Setting that aside'' however, it does seem both sides are of the mind to '''remove success/failure counts''' from the infobox. I do think this is an acceptable compromise/consensus that can be reached on the matter. When Starship starts flying payloads, then success/failure will be much more clear cut. [[User:Gojet-64|Gojet-64]] ([[User talk:Gojet-64|talk]]) 04:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
| |||