Talk:Rocketdyne/Archives/2015
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
In General
Rocketdyne has a rich history that must be longer than a couple of paragraphs. I'm not a qualified source for Rocketdyne history. I can't insert my incomplete knowledge and hope that a qualified persons would would correct that information. It would be good to see information of all the programs Rocketdyne was part. Much very old classified information must have been released for publication by this time. I'm thinking of events back into the pre-1970's. There should be retires that might be willing to contribute to such a historical effort. There are so many topics that the problem I think will be how to boil the subjects down in to a reasonably compact form. Having lived through that important era I know there is a contribution to current events. That contribution can't happen unless Prat & Whitney Rocketdyne opens the flood gates to share and preserve its all important history. While your at this, if you decide to do this, ask P & W Rocketdyne to make a donation to Wikipedia. --Johnswolter (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like much of this has been added, or could be added in the Aerojet merged entity page.TwinkleVain (talk) 09:57, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Dear "In General": Thanks to editors such as BilCat you may never get Rocketdyne's "rich history"
I worked for Rocketdyne for many years, but anytime I attempt to contribute, your smart-ass young editior BilCat cuts me off and accuses me of "origin research". This has happened enough times that I no longer feel like attempting to contribute and I can only wonder how Wikipedia ever hopes to gain credibility. If this problem is ever resolved, please let me know.Magneticlifeform (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Dear "old fart", after looking at the Rocketdyne article, I've already changed "company" to "division" on the North American Aviation page, as that seems to be the better term. Thanks for making us aware of the error in your own way, even if it's not really the best way to do it. Please read WP:OR for what "Original Research is, and why generally isn't permitted on Wikipedia. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Probably this isn't the first time something like this has happened. It might be worthwhile to check if there is some sort of WP program for making use of the expertise of volunteer subject matter experts who are not familiar with the details of WP procedures. Volunteer experts don't grow on trees. Martijn Meijering (talk) 21:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)