Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space missions

message: As now quite a lot of biographies of cosmonauts are created I uploaded a list of the names in cyrillic spelling, which then can be added to the articles - I already did for those articles I noticed. See User:Ahoerstemeier/Cosmonauts for the list. The names in latin are in the german transcription, but it is not too much different from the english one. andy 21:20, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Cosmonauts

message: Over in the biography-oriented Wikiprojects there have been a number of "succession box" templates developed for putting little tables at the bottoms of pages to keep track of who held what titles and offices over time. I'm thinking that we could easily use those templates for space missions, too. For example:
If not this, then we could create our own template based closely on this to maintain a common look-and-feel as well as common coding practice across Wikipedia. (if you're wondering why the "start box" and "end box" templates at the ends, it's to allow multiple succession boxes to be combined. See for example Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston for a huge aggregate of succession boxes, including one in which two titles wind up held by the same successor. Not sure if there'd be anything nearly that complicated in space missions). Bryan 00:27, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Using the succession box template for our own purposes

message: Hi,
I think that the numbering of Mercury flights with a single number is problematical.
NASA never numbered the Mercury missions this way.  Instead there were separate number sequences based (primarily) on the launch vehicle.  So launches involving Mercury spacecraft were numbered as:
BA-n for the Beach Abort Test(s) which didn't really use a launch vehicle per-se but rather just the escape tower rockets.  It's unclear whether there was more than one Beach Abort test, one source claims that there were three, but I've only found one mentioned in the official NASA project summary report.
LJ-n for the Little Joe test flights which primarily tested the Mercury escape system. Some of the Little Joe test flights had letters added to the number when a test had to be re-flown after a failure e.g. LJ-1A, LJ-1B
BJ-1 for the single Big Joe flight which was used to test the heat shield. The Big Joe was really an Atlas.
MR-n for the Mercury Redstone flights.  In the case of MR-1, which failed in the famous 'pop gun' abort depicted in the movie "The Right Stuff" the reflight was MR-1A.
There was also an MR-BD (for Booster Development) flight which was inserted between MR-2 (which carried Ham) and MR-3 which was the first manned Mercury flight, because the Redstone on the Ham flight overperformed.  Since this was a booster test, the payload was a boilerplate capsule, not a production version.
MA-n for the Mercury Atlas flights.  
The flight order of these "sub-programs" was interleaved, at least until the manned flights started.
MA-1 (which was overall flight number 8 ignoring the two questionable Beach Abort "flights") actually preceded the first MR flight, which was overall flight no 10. I'll put these overall flight numbers in parentheses below, but keep in mind that NASA never used sequential overall numbers.
MR-1 (10),and 1A(11) were unmanned. MR-2(12) (Ham) was a primate flight. MR-3(18) (Shepard), and MR-4(19) (Grissom) were the two manned Redstone flights.
MA-1(8) ,2(13), 3(16), and 4(20) were unmanned, MA-5(21) (Enos) was a primate flight. MA-6(22) (Glenn), MA-7(23) (Carpenter) MA-8(24) (Schirra), and MA-9(25) (Cooper) were the manned Atlas flights.
I have a mediawiki site which is focused on the Mercury program for modelers. For a full list of Mercury flights see:
http://www.denhaven2.homeip.net/wiki/index.php?title=Mercury_Spacecraft_Modeling#Mercury_Flight_Order
--Rick 21:39, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mercury Mission Numbering

message: Is this also a parent project for this one? siafu 22:22, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there really isn't a WikiProject Space. It is just a list. Rmhermen 13:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I am working on WikiProject Space to be a collection of information on the various space-related WikiProjects and Portals for ease of finding. --Exodio 16:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Space|WikiProject Space]]

message: User:Knowledge Seeker has started to italicize all spacecraft names, manned and unmanned. This is in line with major style guides. This will be a large effort if anyone wants to help. If there is no objection I will soon add a line in the project guidelines about this. Rmhermen 23:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Italicize spacecraft names

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Walkerma 03:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been looking over other articles to find more suggestions, and there are quite a few "decent" articles (e.g., the Venera series, the Sputnik program, Mars Express) that aren't necessarily good or feature quality.  They have the most important facts, and not much else (including copyright or POV).  How much do we need for "B-class", really?  If they don't muster, it wouldn't take much work to push them over the edge, but it's just not too clear from the criteria page supplied. siafu 06:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The criteria that we use is available here, but you're more than welcome to adopt your own requirements for articles to fit in those categories. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project 

message: I've noticed a lot of the spacecraft that I have worked on are pretty sparse, and I'd like to flesh them out a bit. I was looking for a standard format to follow. Rob 05:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is in a most of the rules are set, most of the heavy lifting done sort of state. So not really inactive. If you are talking about rockets, there is also Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch vehicles It may be that spacecraft fall into the cracks between the two projects. Rmhermen 21:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this project active? 

message: I've just cleaned out a load of linkspam from space-related articles. The major offender was space.gs, who spam us extensively and often, but I also found "sister sites" of theirs (ie, a new domain and same republished dross) - these others were astronautics.org.uk, exploration-space.com, newsweather.co.uk, astronautics.tv, space-nasa.com and astronautics-nasa.com. Lots and lots of spammy goodness.
I've mentioned this here for future reference - please note any other heads you encounter from this particular hydra. Shimgray | talk | 16:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkspam 

message: Shouldn't Wikipedia:WikiProject Unmanned Space Missions be a descendant WikiProject? 24.126.199.129 00:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Descendant WikiProject

message: (Note: I separated out the date discussion because the time issue became more immediately of interest and the date issue is more complex than I originally thought.)
In the list on the main page under Structure/Space Missions, there is an item I have questions about:
*"Times in the text of a document should be in 12-hour local time (with UTC offset given)"
Seems like a good idea for things like launch or landing that have a "local" time.  But what about spacewalk times or ISS-Shuttle mating times?  What is "local"?  Local to the editor?  Local to ground control?  Local to launch site?  I think I favor UTC in those cases.
Thoughts?--3Idiot 16:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the use of UTC. Maybe a conversion guide can be placed on the talk page of a current shuttle mission so that editors can easily convert, eg. UTC = EDT+4, UTC=EST+5, etc. Atrian 14:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I am unaware of that format being followed. I think all the pages use UTC with occasional local time in parentheses.  I think that was probably an old instruction that was never adopted. Rmhermen 18:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, that's the time zone used as the edit timestamps... Coldstream 21:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be better if a single time format was used throughout, so I would suggest using GMT/UTC/UT/Zulu (whatever you want to call it) as the primary format for all instances, with local time in parenthesis, even if they are specific. This will prevent the articles looking scrappy as they alternate between time formats. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 18:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this suggestion. As the human space exploration enterprise begins to include more international partners, this will only become more of an issue. The Columbus  control center is in Germany, right? So ESA press releases may well use that timezone. JAXA will be in the mix soon too. Either Wikipedia readers are all going to need to learn to convert from multiple timezones, or Wikipedia editors are. I favor putting the burden on editors rather than readers. (sdsds - talk) 19:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Time format discussion

message: A request has been made for International Space Station to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of the article. // Duccio (write me) 22:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISS peer review 

message: I've started a :Category:WikiProject Space missions templates, and Template:Space mission, but haven't tagged many articles. Mlm42 08:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  templates category 

message: I feel uneasy when i read many of the Space Shuttle mission pages.. most of them, the main body of text is copied directly from a NASA webpage. i don't have a problem with that, except sometimes, (STS-91, STS-92, and many more) the text copied was written before the mission, so is in the future tense.. that's not so bad, because you know what you're reading was the plan, and not neccessarily what happened.. the problem is that some editors will change all the future tense to past tense (e.g. STS-93) - thus apparently fixing the problem! this worries me.. any thoughts? Mlm42 09:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  STS missions updating 

message: I have two questions.. firstly, on the project page, does anyone else get the [edit] link at the side of each section? because they aren't showing up for me.. and i'd like them to.. secondly, shouldn't we change the name of the project to Wikipedia:WikiProject Manned Space Missions, or even Wikipedia:WikiProject Human Spaceflights? Mlm42 10:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that they disappeared a few months ago. I have no idea why though? Maybe ask at the Help Desk. Rmhermen 15:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject 

message: I think the categories of these missions need some cleaning up.. for example, pretty much everything is in :Category:Human spaceflights.. but really, that should be mostly empty with some big subcategories, like :Category:Space Shuttle missions, :Category:Apollo missions, :Category:Soyuz missions, etc. how does that sound? Mlm42 10:39, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems useful. Any category with over 200 entries is overpopulated in my opinion. (requiring paging through the category list which may not alphabetize correctly) Rmhermen 15:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: I've just finished rewriting pages Soyuz TMA-9 and Expedition 14 - i'd appreciate it if people had a quick look and check I haven't missed anything out, and check for errors. Thanks - Colds7ream 17:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The table on Expedition 14 has several parameters which need to be filled in with "In orbit" or "Still in orbit". Rmhermen 15:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review request. 

message: See discussion at Template talk:Infobox Astronaut#Astronaut/Cosmonaut regarding the infobox fields and the designation of space tourists, as well as guests on another nation's vehicle. --Dhartung | Talk 06:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astronaut/Cosmonaut 

message: It's occurred to me that there's an extrenmely major fault with the Space Shuttle SRB page - the entire article is written as if the SRBs carry the Orbiter, when in fact the Orbiter is capable of lifting itself off the ground - the SRBs are only there to heft the fuel tank off the launchpad. Oops! Colds7ream 17:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It says "The Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) is the rocket that provides 83% of liftoff thrust for the Space Shuttle."  This statement is correct.  While the SSMEs are powerful enough to lift the orbiter off the ground in theory, the vehicle is going to space.  The article very acurately states that the SRBs get the vehicle into a position such that the SSMEs can take it the rest of the way into space.  I guess I don't see a "major fault" in the article.  It describes exactly what the SRBs do. Cjosefy 22:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solid Rocket Boosters 

message: I've started the Space exploration WikiProject, but there's nothing there right now. My hope is that we will be able impliment the article assessment that's going on at the 1.0 editoral team, as they are trying to Work via Wikiprojects. Over 100 other wikiprojects are already following suit; the articles within the scope of this project could greatly benefit from being apart of this.. thoughts? (discuss here) Mlm42 17:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Space exploration]] 

message: as some of you will have noticed, i've been tagging many article, under the broad topic of Space exploration, with the tag . this banner has a built in assessment feature.. you can rate the articles quality (out of Stub/Start/B/GA/A/FA), and the importance (Low/Mid/High/Top). The quality has a pretty clear grading scheme, but the importance is much more subjective.
anyway, to do this, for example, add  to the Talk page. the banner also has a link to a pretty bot generated list (update once a day, around 10am UTC) of all articles with the Space exploration tag. so feel free to help out, and tag and assess some articles. :) also, when rating an article, you may feel a desire to justify your rating; if so, a comment on the Talk page with the heading "Assessment" seems appropriate. Mlm42 09:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  article assessments 

message: Please comment on the merge proposal. Rmhermen 01:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[space exploration]] and [[spaceflight]]

message: *I prefer the old system of describing the Soyuz crew:
*Crew up (the two or three guys)
*Crew down (the two of three guys)
I know that makes repeats, but I think that the "trick" used to avoid to repeat names makes the lists difficult to read and understand. I am for clarity even if it means repeating names.Hektor 17:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crew of Soyuz

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 23:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Hey, I am really into space, and think this project is cool. I was just wondering if there were userboxes for user pages? Thanks. Jmclark911 15:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: User Box

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: Hello,
I just nominated the Olympus Mons article for the Article Creation and Improvement Drive because I think that that article deserves to be class A. I thought this nomination might be of some interest to you all. Thanks! S.dedalus 06:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Olympus Mons]]

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 16:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: The 'WikiProject Space missions' page says, Please be aware that the preferred terminology is "manned" and "unmanned".  Please be aware that neither NASA nor ESA prefers this terminology.  NASA uses "crewed" to refer to current and planned missions, and "human spaceflight" more generally.  There's a reason why the older terminology has become antiquated, and wikipedia should follow the lead of these government space organizations.  Sdsds 03:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missions with crews 

message: Would members of this project take a look at Independent evidence for human Moon landings? Bubba73 (talk), 22:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't we just merge this into Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations. That article is in awful shape and really isn't needed except in respect to the accusations. Rmhermen 23:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, one of the pro-hoax editors started the article.  Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations already has a "too long" tag on it.  Bubba73 (talk), 23:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Seems to me to be a deeply, deeply problematic article, in that the whole premise (that is, evidence of moon landings provided by NASA or its subonctractors is untrustworthy) is flawed. If it doesn't improve very soon, I would support deletion. There are other good ways to create subarticles of the main article, and this isn't one of them. MLilburne 23:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Along those lines, one of the editors accused the person who started the article of violating WP:POINT, using WP to make or argue a point.  Bubba73 (talk), 00:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here are a couple of other articles along those lines:
* Apollo program missing tapes
* Examination of Apollo moon photos Bubba73 (talk), 05:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article 

message: At Talk:STS-117#Regarding_Wikiproject_Space_Missions, Colds7ream wrote:
I would like, please, to gauge everyone's thoughts regarding the Wikiproject that is supposed to be governing pages such as this, Wikiproject: Space Missions. As far as I can see, the project seems to be in total meltdown, with no real updates to the project page since August 2006, inactivity with the project's assessing of pages, and a general complete lack of input from the project. To be honest, I don't think its serving the space shuttle mission community as well as it could, and as such i'd like to propose one of two things happen:
1. The project has a total overhaul with wikipedians who are actually going to keep the project running properly restarting it and operating it as it should be.
2. Forking a daughter project dedicated to Space Shuttle Missions (goodness knows we have enough pages to keep up-to-date) off the project with those contributors who are active in Shuttle pages setting up and running the project properly, enabling pages such as this to have an active wikiproject supporting them.
Just my twopenneth - personally, i'd prefer the fork option, but I'd appreciate other people's views. Colds7ream 18:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  total meltdown? 

message: I converted the  template to use navbox generic. If people like it, i'll do the same for the other "Mission" templates. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 20:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  updated space shuttle mission templates. 

message: To standardize shuttle missions, see STS-116, STS-117, STS-118) I have merged Timeline of STS-115 into STS-115, and the Timeline page should be deleted. I'll tag it and it can be discussed, but it has been orphaned since March 2007, and as we're trying to standardize all the mission articles into the same format,  it seemed odd for this page to have a separate timeline page hanging out there. I've also updated the project page to reflect past flights, and future, as it seems to have not been updated for almost a year (It lists STS-115 as a future flight). I don't see much discussion here, so I'm hoping someone sees this :) Ariel♥Gold 00:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: Timeline of STS-115 redirected to STS-115. Ariel♥Gold 02:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[STS-115]]

message: I'm seeking consensus at MOSNUM talk for a change in the wording to allow contributors, by consensus only, to use unconverted metrics in scientific articles. Your opinions are invited. Tony 15:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already left we opinions. They are very few scientific contexts where it is appropriate. None I can think of which involve space missions. Rmhermen 15:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  allowing unconverted metrics in scientific articles 

message: An article is up for deletion where a key claim for notability is that this person might have been the first to "successfully calculate the way to inject a satellite into a geosynchronous orbit" Some expert opinions and reliable sources on the validity of this claim would be appreciated. Tim Vickers 01:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: AfD for [[Stanley Dunin]]

message: Per the manual of style on flag icon use, flags should be used sparingly, and not used in the article prose. Flags should also not emphasize nationality without a good reason, "Flags are visually striking, and placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things." NASA represents the US, and it is a given that NASA astronauts represent America. However, when the astronauts on missions are representing countries other than NASA, it is appropriate to specify this, although the MOS would still discourage the use of the flag icon. The icons are quite distracting when 6/8 people listed on a mission article have US flags next to them. Note that this has nothing to do with national pride, or with national identity, but simply used sparingly to help a reader, and not to decorate. To this end, USA astronauts need not have the flag icon next to them, as it is obvious they represent America by being with NASA. This is a relatively new guideline, so many people may not be familiar with it, so this is why I'm bringing the issue here for discussion. I've also placed this discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human Spaceflight, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space exploration, since none of these project talk pages are particularly active. I appreciate anyone's imput or ideas, but I've removed the  flag icons from the most recent missions, to conform with the Manual of Style, and the articles are much less distracting without them. Ariel♥Gold 13:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag icon use 

message: I have proposed that to reduce overlap and inactivity, this project and WikiProject Space travellers are merged into WikiProject Human Spaceflight. Please see the Human Spaceflight WikiProject's talk page for more details and discussion. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I can support this. I have a suggestion though: I think we should organize it somewhat like WP:Television. Lets have "guides" for the different type of contents the project covers. That makes sure that every different type of content is still properly addressed within the project, while also allowing the communication to be centralized, and hopefully more active. The differences in type of the content are often what lead to the splitting of projects. It is understandable, but in the process a lot of the communication is often also lost. If people really want to keep separate "groups" of editors as well, than Taksforces can be considered, but personally, I would prefer a bigger Project. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 00:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger