Talk:Space architecture

Spaceflight C‑class Top‑importance

	Spaceflight portal 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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scope of article

Concerns over the scope of the article have been raised, namely regarding space-based or supporting infrastructure. Neither space-based infrastructure for ground purposes, like cell phone satellites and spy satellites, nor ground-based infrastructure for space purposes, like research and manufacturing processes, are covered in this article beyond brief mention. James Doehring (talk) 04:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The section on etymology seems out-of-place and unnecessary, though some of the points such as the discussion of the distinction between "Space Architecture" as the more general or as the more specific form of architecture seem warranted. Can anyone give a good reason not to get rid of most of this section?129.92.250.45 (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strange, I came here to say just this. Let's give it another week to see if anyone responds. Viriditas (talk) 03:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]