User talk:Audin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greetings! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you have questions or doubts of any sort, do not hesitate to post them on the Village Pump, somebody will respond ASAP. Other helpful pages include:

Have fun! --Jiang 04:01 19 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hi. Next time, don't hesitate to leave a note on my, or any other admins, talk page if you require anything. (In reference to the NASA move deletion thing) The chances that your request will be seen are much higher that way. --snoyes 02:05, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Nice spot in Oort cloucd. The Öpik date made me wonder, and I had to check the Edwin Hubble article for when the idea of external galaxies were established: only 8 years before! - Jeandré, 2003-12-01t12:37z

Hi - maybe you'd like to also put your name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Space Missions? I've suggested that the project adopts your data table for launch vehicles as a standard. I hope to add it to the Vostok rocket Voskhod rocket Soyuz rocket and forthcoming Saturn I rocket pages. --Rlandmann 07:28, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Another couple of suggestions for the launch vehicle data table:

  • most wikipedia data tables use a background colour for headings - see Messerschmitt Me 262 as an example straight off the top of my head. I encourage you to pick a colour for the standard :)
  • Launch vehicles are all tall and skinny... Just a wild idea at the moment, but maybe photos could be places alongside tables rather than above them? I might play with this and see how it goes...

--Rlandmann 03:48, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I'm going to check if we can use a background image... Seems to be a starry sky background for the title would be most appropriate. Audin 04:37, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Okay, there's an example at User:Audin now. However, it is not a long-term solution as the background image is being served from my own webserver. If anyone likes the effect we can ask a developer to put the background image on the wikipedia server somewhere... Incidently, i suspect it is a bug in wiki that I am able to link to that image.
You can upload images to Wiki, ni? Why not upload the image and avoid the external link? Elf 21:33, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Thoughts on rocket table

The ragged left (right-aligned) is harder to visually scan than left-aligned, and having empty cells between the stages seems to imply that there's missing info. How about something like this--clearer to scan visually, and markup is much easier to work with for a new table. (And BTW I also used "!" for table header rows :-) and used width=50% on first column in case you really want to bring data closer to labels ). Something to think about, anyway, if you haven't already considered this strategy. Elf 21:33, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Saturn V
Saturn V launch
Saturn V launching Apollo 15.
Stage 1
Engines 5 * F-1
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
Stage 2
Engines
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
Stage 3
Engines
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
Three stage version
Payload to LEO 118,000 kg
Payload to TLI 47,000 kg


Saturn V
Saturn V launch
Saturn V launching Apollo 15.
Stages 3
1 Engines 5 * F-1
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
2 Engines
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
3 Engines
Thrust lbs
ISP sec
Burn time ~ sec
Fuels RP-1/LOX
Three stage version
Payload to LEO 118,000 kg
Payload to TLI 47,000 kg


Hrm. I don't have major complaints about either format. The right-alignedness of my suggestion was originally brought about as an experiment. In the end I liked the denseness (seems wrong to have several whole lines of each table taken up with the largly useless 'Stage X' wording), closeness of label to associated data (true not most efficient for scanning, but probably most efficient for reading, as the eye doesn't have to try to scroll to the right and hope to line up with the associated data), reuse of the 'Stages' header, and general uniqueness of the table. I've added background colors (your color choice, though it might be an idea to use the stars there as well) to my example above to more clearly denote the sections.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by empty cells. None of them are meant to be empty, assuming the data is available. The Engines cell should have the number and type of engines used by that stage.

I didn't use ! for headers in my example because at the time I put it together the ! handling was buggy and wouldn't handle a combo header + data row.

As to the background image: you can upload and link to images in mediawiki, but not, as far as I know, as backgrounds. So my plan, if people liked the stars (which they now seem to) is to ask that some kind developer add a 'space-table' class to the css file which would like to the image.

Audin 00:50, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Empty cells--I meant overlapping--trying to describe the stage cells that feel as if they're floating. Although it's nice to save space, it's better to make your info very clear, so you're not wasting space with subheads--you're making better use of the space to convey the info more quickly because the reader doesn't have to interpret the unfamiliar layout.

Any color for subheads will work (I just shoved one in); I suppose the star background, too, but try printing the page--often background images don't print (yes! people still want to print! ) and white text then vanishes on the paper. I kinda like the star background, even given the possible issue with printing. Distinctive.

When I said "visual scan" I really meant "it's harder to read." :-) Think about your eyes as they move down the table--they jumping left and right looking for where the line begins. It's possible that it might be a bit more readable with a large cellpadding, but I still think readers will find it easier left-just. I understand the experiment, yeah, it's hard to read across large spans of white space (that's why I tried the 50% thing) but there might be other ways to fix that than right-just'g the text.

(I've studied & implemented usability for acquiring written info for years, but you can also verify it by decomposing how someone's eyes and thought pattern might work as they view the table. Different people see things differently (duh!)--and so when people don't like how info is presented, I try to understand why and then adjust the format to accommodate. (Once had a discussion w/an engineer who thought a diagram was useless--until I figured out that he was interpreting it differently than intended. Redesign, and it's much better for both of us.) Dang, I'm taking up all this space on your page! But it's fun playing with layout formats, so here I is.

And I didn't know about the earlier table markup bug--guess I'm lucky and got here late enough. Anyway, I'd be glad to give feedback on other stuff you try and if you want to do the same thing for the Rocks & Minerals one I'm trying to sort out, I'd be delighted. Elf 01:55, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You asked "why'd you drop the last three sentences from Big dumb booster?" No burning reason. It just struck me as redundant. The content above concise and factual. But if you think the article flows better or if it adds to content in a way that I didn't see, go ahead and add it back. Rossami 02:52, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

On another page, I was planning on making a link to Delta rockets (as an example of parallel staging), but I notice that Wikipedia is rather scattered on this topic. There are pages for Delta II rocket, Delta rocket, a couple of redirect pages, and "missing pages" which people link to: Delta (rocket) (looks like you've prepared that one) and Delta (rocket family). Got any idea on how this should be cleaned up? Mackerm 05:39, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Re: the Moron you're reverting

This person you're reverting isn't a moron. He's just a noob to Wikipedia. At least, I think he is. Give him the benefit of the doubt.

Hrm, I'm not sure I agree. If he left such a comment in only one place i wouldn't have commented. but since he left similar comments in multiple places... Audin 01:39, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Titan (rocket family)

I found the following statement about the Titan ICBMs in the article

 By 2005 the Titans will likely be extinct.

and I asked myself, well, are they? --Deelkar (talk) 17:27, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-orbital mission infobox

Hello, please see this question I posted on at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unmanned space missions. Thanks, Johntex\talk 17:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Launch vehicles

In an effort to reinvigorate the project, I've begun the process of discussing the current WP:LV standards, which I think are deficient in a number of ways. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch vehicles/Standards discussion. Ingoolemo talk 21:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Atlas-icbm-erection-large.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Atlas-icbm-erection-large.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 03:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Rocketry - Space WikiProjects reorganisation proposal

It has been proposed that WikiProject Launch Vehicles, of which you are a member, be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Rocketry per a proposal to reorganise space-related WikiProjects. The proposal will serve to clarify and expand the scope of the project.
Please post comments and support/oppose votes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space/Reorganisation. Thanks --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 22:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Annular-Aerospike.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Annular-Aerospike.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 13:55, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Integrated Guided Missile Development Program (India)

Hi Dude

I have read this article in details today and it contains overwhleming amount of very dubvious claims with minimal amount of reliable resources.

Being a knowledgable person in this area, could you please have a look this - as in my opinion such articles seriously undermine Wikipedia's reliability as an encyclopedic resource.

Many thanks -- Ash sul 18:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image problem or source flakiness

A tag has been placed on Image:NACA-Logo.png, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

it is not like the image at the source cited http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/ABSTRACTS/GPN-2000-001539.html

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.


[edit] Space missions WikiProject

Hi, I noticed that you are a member of the Space missions WikiProject. A couple of weeks ago, I proposed that the Space missions and Space travellers projects, which both appear to be inactive be merged into the Human Spaceflight project. Whilst this is being done, the capitalisation of the Human spaceflight project's title would also be corrected (ie. Human Spaceflight → Human spaceflight). The projects are all doing the same/very similar things, and in my opinion, a single, larger, project would be more effective than three smaller, and somewhat inactive projects.. In light of very little response to messages on the project talk pages, I am now sending this message to all members of all three projects, inviting them to discuss the proposal on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page. I would appreciate your opinion on this. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)