Quality of references
I think the references of the article are while near the topic not explaining the claimed information of the base properly. one for example us one link away from the article about the base itself. Another is plain Russian illustration without explanation for non-Russian readers. I am posting and editing from a smartphone which makes it hard to fix this all myself. Thereferences and links should be further reading and sources for facts, but like they are now, it is just a unsorted and untitled collection of links. --Urwumpe (talk) 16:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Agree. As you can understand, I collected the most relevant links in terms of raw information for base building. I'm using the wiki as a support for the "default bases tiles + objects" project. That's why I added an orbital photo for example.
I guess that some description on the external links would clarify why they are important. What seems like random images are in fact the building plans for the new installations :-) This is important for add-on creators, for example.Feel free to organize them as you see fit.--4throck (talk) 17:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)