Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] WikiProject Space and WikiProject Astronomy
I suggest that we have a single Wikipedia:Wikiproject Astronomy and the rest as its sister projects. It can be a really huge one if we want. We can make the project template and etc.. Looking forward to start on this one. :) --Electron Kid 02:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- It will be a constant debate as to whether Portal:Astronomy will be the main topic or Portal:Space. I believe that Portal:Space should attempt to organize all data not covered by the science of Astronomy. This includes Exploration, Politics, Space Flights, etc. As such, I believe a list of Portals should be developed that fall under the scope of Portal:Space. See project page for current list of Space related Projects (please add any if you know of missing) --Exodio 02:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improvement drive
Asteroid deflection strategies has been nominated on WP:IDRIVE. Support it with your vote if you want it to be improved.--Fenice 22:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia talk:Stable versions#Certification gang
would you like to create certified articles in science? -- Zondor 03:31, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Improvement drive
Asteroid deflection strategies is currently nominated on WP:IDRIVE. Support the article with your vote if you would like to see it improved on the article improvement drive!--Fenice 18:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Scientific peer review
The board needs scientist from a lot of different projects maybe there is one from SPACE to join the group. --Stone 13:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Saturn
I'm part of the Wikipedia Version 0.5 review team. Please improve the Saturn article, remove the cleanup template, because it is the only Start-rated article in Version 0.5. Thanks. NCurse work 09:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiCast
Hi, As someone connected with the WikiCast project I felt your wikiproject might be intrested in contributing.
WikiCast is a net radio station for 'free' content.
It's wiki is at : http://wiki.epstone.net/wikicast/Main_Page
WikiCast needs content, and I was wondering if you had any suggestions or contributions?
WikiCast plans to have a reasonably serious astronomy spot called 'Nocturne' Any budding Moore or Sagan here? ShakespeareFan00 19:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hi ShakespeareFan00 - WikiProject Space is not heavily populated at the moment. It was basically non-existent, most folks interested more in WikiProject Astronomy. You might want to try MilleauRekiir or George J. Bendo - I have seen their names pop up on a couple of Space related sites and they show a high degree of knowledge. --Exodio 22:14, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Astronomical subjects
Please review Special:Contributions/Mlhooten and Special:Contributions/166.82.166.38. Uncle G 14:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- What is supposed to be reviewed? The Astrosciences additions?--Exodio 14:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Nevermind. I see what you mean. I think all the pages categorized into Astroscience should be have the statements removed until this is further explored --Exodio 14:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Satallites Footer
- Is there a reason why they are not in the same format?
- ie.
- Satellites of Pluto Remove
- Saturn's natural satellites Remove
- Saturn (satellites) Keep
- I vote for the format, "Planet (satellites)", so there is not a use of the apostrophe 's'. Thanks, CarpD (^_^) 8/27/06 7:30pm central time zone.
- I think it should be "Natural satellites of Saturn" and "Artificial satellites of Earth" possibly. Or "Satellites of Saturn (natural) " and "Satellites of Earth (artificial)" --Exodio 00:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Space science
- Look at what has happened to space science! Should we really have content such as "Animals On Other Planets proposed neologism"? Uncle G 15:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Articles listed for deletion
The above article has beem listed at AFD. Please contribute to the discussion. Uncle G 15:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism/POV-pushing at Langley Research Center
There seem to have been a bunch of garbled, semi-literate edits over at Langley Research Center recently, pushing a "moon landing was faked" POV. I was tempted simply to delete it all, but there might actually be some parts that are worth salvaging, and I don't feel qualified to judge which ones (if any). If there's a more appropriate sub-project for me to take this to, please let me know. Xtifr tälk 16:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Portal:Space exploration vs. Portal:Spaceflight
I'm not convinced there should be a Spaceflight portal, since the overlap with Space exploration is huge; perhaps Portal:Spacecraft would be more appropriate? there the focus would clearly be on the mechanics of spaceflight, without having the overlap of the exploration.. notice the selected Biography in Portal:Spaceflight. Mlm42 11:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Black hole
Black hole is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 16:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Project directory
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 23:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Moon
I came across this as I was tagging articles as {{moon-stub}}s. It currently has only one member, but I don't want to see this project become inactive and then become MfD fodder. Hence this post here, to raise a bit of interest. MER-C 09:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Olympus Mons
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)
[edit] Template:WikiProject Space/Categories
Does anyone use Template:WikiProject Space/Categories? Given the category update work that I and other people have done, it already looks out-of-date. It is also incredibly unwieldly to maintain. Would anyone object if I nominated it for deletion? If not, I will nominate it for deletion on 14 Dec 2006. Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 19:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
- Given the lack of response, I will nominate the template for deletion. Dr. Submillimeter 12:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards
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 16:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possible Astronomy Featured Topic
(This message copied to WP:Astronomical objects, WP:Space, and WP:Astronomy)
Hey! I was looking around for groups of articles to nominate as a Featured Topic, and I came across Upsilon Andromedae, b, c, and d. All four of these articles are GA class, and together fulfill every requirement of a FT, except that none of them are Featured Articles themselves. If one of them, preferably Upsilon Andromedae itself, was promoted to Featured Article, then the Topic as a whole would most likely pass FTC. So, if anyone wants to shoot for that, have at it! Also, if any members of this Wikiproject know of a group of articles that fits the criteria, then please nominate them! Thank you! --PresN 18:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Scientific peer review - new
It is nearly 11 months since we established this review process as a minimal process after we failed to reach consensus about a number of matters. During that time it has been largely left alone with nobody really keeping a close watch on it. A couple days ago I cleaned everything up. I archived old reviews, corrected the tags on talk pages and made minimal changes to the process based on what I had learnt. I also reviewed how it had operated. There were some reasonable reviews and some that attracted no interest what so ever, but I guess that is the case even with Wikipedia:Peer review. Some entries may have missed some attention since they were not properly formatted, or had no tag on the article's talk page and hence did not appear in the category. See Wikipedia talk:Scientific peer review for my review and report on the clean up.
Of course, in hindsight, I wonder whether we, and particularly I, could have done better a year ago. In hindsight, does anyone have ideas how we progress this review process. To be worthwhile, it must attract reviews that perhaps would not go elsewhere such as Wikipedia:Peer review and it must attract expert reviewers to add to what might be achieved by the general Wikipedia:Peer review. If it can not do either, perhaps we should close it down and just encourage articles to go to Wikipedia:Peer review. Articles for review are listed on the science WikiProjects such as this one, but they are transcluded in so changes do not appear on watchlists. I have also added recent reviews to Wikipedia:Peer review in the same way that WikiProject reviews such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/Peer review are added. In this way both review pages refer to the same page for the review discussion and hopefully more editors will be attracted. The key point is attracting expert reviewers who might look at Wikipedia:Scientific peer review but not look at Wikipedia:Peer review.
If you have any ideas on this, please add your views at Wikipedia talk:Scientific peer review. --Bduke 02:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hellø!!
I enlisted myself in WikiProject_Space for a cleanup/coordination effort of foremost astronomy, although non-astronomical space issues will get the benefits (?) of my poking around. I wish (and probably I'll doitmyslef):
- A central link apparatus (template, transclusion or so), that enables anyone entering into any Space related portal/wikiproject a navigation box where to find the relevant portal/wikiproject/wikiproject talk,
- A centalized astronewspaper,
- A more specific description on scope of topics (s.a.f.ex. not Astrology) we take care of,
- and what measures to take in order to coordinate the activity
- some more...
Said Rursus 12:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC) before going on.
[edit] Category:Space Launches by Month/Year
Can someone please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space exploration#Category:Space Launches by Month/Year. Thanks. --WikiSlasher 00:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ESA images
I keep wanting to upload ESA images to wikimedia, and I keep getting put off - there is no licence tag for them on the scroll down list like there is for NASA, even though the ESA website seems quite laid back with copyright, am I allowed to use them, what licence tag do I use, where is more info... help :), sbandrews 19:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- You can't as it's non-commercial use only and these may be deleted without warning. MER-C 09:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Conversion templates
Hello! This is to announce that several templates for automatic convertion between metric and imperial units and for displaying consistently formatted output have been created: {{km to mi}}, {{mi to km}}, {{m to ft}}, {{ft to m}}, {{km2 to mi2}}, {{mi2 to km2}}, {{m2 to ft2}}, and {{ft2 to m2}}. Hopefully, they will be useful to the participants of this WikiProject. The templates are all documented, provide parameters to fine-tune the output, and can be substituted if necessary.
Any suggestions, requests for improvement/features, or bug reports are welcome.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Veryvery good!! Just one question: is there anywhere a template list listing and explaining these conversion templates (example here), more than just the automatic Category:Conversion templates? Because, then we can make a link from Wikipedia:WikiProject Space and all subwikiprojects to that template list. Rursus 17:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, unfortunately not. Not yet, anyway, but it is the goal of the WP:TSP project to create such a reference book.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Then I'll do one provisional and very temporary at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Space/phys unit templs, that the WP:TSP may reuse, move or reject by own judgement. Soon. Rursus 14:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, unfortunately not. Not yet, anyway, but it is the goal of the WP:TSP project to create such a reference book.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Done. Rursus 15:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
-
| Project discussion |
|---|
-
-
- As everybody with eyes on stalks have seen (snails and such), the chaosion of Wikipedia:WikiProject Space/Reorganisation have produced a template for navigation between various Space related projects. See right!
-
[edit] Merging projects
I just discovered how many wikiprojects there are in this space (sorry for the pun). I think we should merge some of these project pages together. There isn't enough critical mass of interested users to support so many individual projects. Many of these projects overlap; it makes it hard to discuss things because many topics don't fit neatly into a single project. Some of these projects only have 1-2 declared members, and membership overlaps anyway even for the larger ones. We've been discussing space probes at WP Astronomy and I just now realized there are separate projects on WP Space exploration, WP Launch vehicles, WP Space missions, WP Unmanned space missions, WP Timeline of spaceflight, WP Human spaceflight, ... where the discussion would be relevant. Comments? —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-25 02:28Z
- This is precisely the reason for the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space/Reorganisation. At the moment it is still a problem, but we are working on it! :) Mlm42 17:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
