Talk:Eutelsat OneWeb

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Spaceflight Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications 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.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

First satellite[edit]

When will it be launched and on which rocket? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.109.122.16 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sep 2017 source[edit]

Lots of detailed info in theses two SpaceNews articles:

http://spacenews.com/fully-automated-satellite-assembly-lines-not-quite-yet/, Sep2017. This one has more OneWeb-specific content, but def addresses the entire sat industry, and the change that is coming with sat manufacturing automation, and that most of these vendors (smaller/tradtional sat mfgrs up to the size of OneWeb at a to-be-built constellation of 900 saying publically that robotic and automated mfging has limited use in their biz plans. (SpaceX is not quoted.)
http://spacenews.com/greater-standardization-only-way-to-meet-demand-for-faster-cheaper-satellites-builders-say/ Sep 2017. This source is more (mostly) legacy sat industry commsat market incumbents saying that we need more standardization across the sat industry, less one-off and bespoke design-build processes. It is not clear what approach these players might favor; e.g., industry standard groups, which they are obviously free to form. Hmmm. Or are they? Most private companies in the tech industry do this all the time. Perhaps it is a warning shot from the industry to the space regulators which tends to be very patchwork, and in the case of the US with ITAR regulations, perhaps super problematic.

Cheers. N2e (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Starts launching[edit]

Update. OneWeb to start launching sats: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47374246 Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 04:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Bid for 20% of OneWeb to replace Galileo after Brexit ‘looks like nationalism trumping industrial policy’ "[edit]

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/jun/26/satellite-experts-oneweb-investment-uk-galileo-brexit

too complicated for me - is there a fellow wikipedian who wants to bring aspects of that into the article ? --Neun-x (talk) 22:34, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was merge. Cyfal (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging OneWeb satellite constellation into OneWeb. Although, according to its article, the OneWeb satellite constellation started with rumours about Google and then was started by SkyBridge, most of the time it was OneWeb's project. Both articles have a large overlap. --Cyfal (talk) 15:08, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it makes sense to me. There is a lot of duplication.Davidbstanley (talk) 09:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~ Quinnerwinner12 (talk) 14:10, 16 November 2022 (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.

Post merger comments[edit]

It's unfortunate that the above merger was done. Now we have an article about both a company and a satellite constellation, very different things with different attributes and infoboxes. Overlap could have been edited out of the least relevant article. A future split will be more effort. - Rod57 (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citations Don't work after 128[edit]

I wanted to read in on something and noticed that when I clicked citation number 131 nothing appeared and it just linked me back to the article. Scrolling down to the References I noticed it stopped at 128. I have no clue how to fix this hope someone who knows what they're doing can help. Thinker21 (talk) 09:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks – I mended it by removing a comment from inside one citation. -- Wire723 (talk) 12:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Trikekus (:3) 01:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC) Trikekus (:3) 01:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What propulsion on the 1st gen sats ?[edit]

Oneweb is linked from Busek but this article doesn't mention Busek or their ion thrusters. - Rod57 (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updates needed - OneWeb is now "Eutelsat OneWeb" after completion of acquisition[edit]

On 28 September 2023, Eutelsat announced the completion of the acquisition of OneWeb, and also that:

OneWeb will now be rebranded "Eutelsat OneWeb" (and this has already changed)
Both the original "Eutelsat" and the new "Eutelsat OneWeb" will now be subsidiaries of a larger "Eutelsat Group".

Both this OneWeb page and the EutelSat page will need updates to accompany this change. Right now the main information seems to be primary sources:

So far I've seen one CNBC article (with video interview at end) but not yet many other articles. I expect we'll see more in the week ahead.

I updated the lead paragraph to reflect the new name and the acquisition completion, but other parts of this article need to be updated, too, and I unfortunately don't have the time today to do so. I'm leaving this info all here in hopes that others will have time. - Dyork (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should it not be described as a merger rather than acquisition? The Eutelsat press releases use the word 'combination' i.e. merger. Davidbstanley (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be moved to "Eutelsat OneWeb" and redirect added[edit]

Per the section I added above, as of 28 September 2023, the company's name is now Eutelsat OneWeb and I think the page should be migrated to that new name. As part of that, a redirect should be set up for "OneWeb" so that it redirects to "Eutelsat OneWeb". I haven't done a page rename in a number of years and so I'd prefer that someone else with more experience does this! - Dyork (talk) 16:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 October 2023[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 13:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OneWeb → Eutelsat OneWeb – As Eutelsat has been merged with OneWeb (SPACENEWS), it's time to rename the article. Pinging @Dyork: on the basis of their comment here. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ 🗿 05:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree it is time for the change. Davidbstanley (talk) 13:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just the company getting a new name or is the constellation also receiving a new name? AmigaClone (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just the company. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ 🗿 13:01, 2 November 2023 (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.

Thank you for doing the move[edit]

I wasn't paying attention to Wikipedia notifications and so missed the ping, but I would have agreed with the intention to move. Thank you for making it happen.

Regarding the question from @AmigaClone:

Is it just the company getting a new name or is the constellation also receiving a new name?

I agree with Akshadev that at the moment it is only the company name. But given the way the company is using "Eutelsat OneWeb" throughout their new press releases and pages, I expect they will continue to push the re-branding and maybe at some point the whole thing will be changed over. (But there are 540+ satellites in space right now that are branded "OneWeb" - I don't expect anyone will be flying up to put a new sticker on!) Perhaps we'll see when they launch their next group of sats. - Dyork (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]