Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Space

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Space
Space Portal
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Space.


Contents

[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

[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)
Done. Rursus 15:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Project discussion
Space WikiProjects
v • d • e
Space (coordinating)
templates ☍ collaboration
Astronomy
★Astronomical objects
☉Constellations task force
Solar System
Mars • Moon
Spaceflight

Human spaceflight • Rocketry • Space colonization • Timeline of spaceflight • Unmanned space missions
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!
Observe right of Space (coordinating)! There is a templates link, which points to a repository of links to various template documentation pages over most space related templates. (Space, the final frontier ... etc) Rursus 15:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[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)
Thanks, Dr. Submillimeter pointed me to the page too. I missed that huge banner at the top of this talk page, doh... —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-27 11:25Z

[edit] Soyuz TMA

The manned spaceflights of the Soyuz TMA's to the ISS need some serious cleanup. {{Infobox Space mission}} needs to be added to many of them (because they use html infoboxes now), and a lot of the prose is still written like the things are up in space. Lead-in's are missing, all that sort of stuff. It's an easy job and I fixed a couple of infoboxes already, but since i'm not really a WP Space editor, someone else might care to take a look as well. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 21:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings → Apollo missions tracked by independent parties

Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings → Apollo missions tracked by independent parties- proposed by user:ScienceApologist. 132.205.44.134 23:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Pluto spacecraft, Template:Neptune spacecraft, Template:Uranus spacecraft

Template:Pluto spacecraft has been proposed for deletion at WP:TFD by user:Cop 633. 132.205.44.134 23:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Artificial Satellite → (multiple possibilities)

Apparently "Satellite" was renamed Artificial Satellite at some point. 132.205.44.134 21:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pear review request

I listed an image of the galaxy cluster Cl 0024+17 taken by the Hubble Space Telescope to see if it should be a featured picture candidates or not, It is listed here Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Dark matter your input is appreciated. ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡Talk 04:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] pages that require infobox work

Wikipedia:WikiProject Space/Infoboxes is a list of pages that have raw infobox tables instead of using templated infoboxes. If you feel like fixing one of them, please do so. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] EVA template:in space

I twiddled with Template:in space to add an "eva=yes" parameter which changes the text of the info box and includes a link to the EVA article. Is there some clever code that could be added to the EVA article so that, whenever any use of Template:in space has an "eva=yes", a message box appears on the EVA article linking to the current spacewalker? (Sdsds - Talk) 18:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Mercury Program

Template:Mercury Program is up for deletion at WP:TFD, because it overlaps with Template:Project Mercury. 132.205.44.134 01:27, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] a bunch of things were prodded because of transwiki to wiktionary on June 3rd

Chasma, Dorsum, Flexus, Flumen, Fluctus, Linea, Macula (planetary geology), Mensa (geology), Rupes, Tholus. Personally, I feel they should be redirected somewhere... 132.205.44.134 22:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for GeoHack rewrite or Geohack like extension for Space / Mars

Hello, I've just joined this group. I have a long term interest in Space and am very familiar with many of the issues. I started a Source Forge project [1]. The project direction is under review, but it will probably end up writing any extra needed extensions for Space / Mars / Planetary pages. Could GeoHack (for example [2] ) be used to spit out location resources for Space / Planetary locations ? This could eventually include other planets and locations in the heavens (an ascension/declination), but I suggest it is intially focussed on Mars, the nearest planet and with a long/lat system similiar to Earth. NASA WorldWind can already open these locations for Mars, as can Google Mars. All the main space agencies have databases that can be opened using a link to give a particular location (for example [3] ). There are probably other resources. The uses for this are obvious for region descriptions and locations like the Mars Exploration Rover landing sites, for example. A use I want to put it to is to have definitions for particular images, with the article having the image number title (for example [4] ). A Mars Geohack would then allow easy cross correlation with other Orbiter images ! I'm not sure what the Wikipedia policy is on having an encyclopaedic definition for a particular image ... but why not ? DJ Barney 14:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

the subject/title for a wiki page has to be notable - i dont think an image number as a title/subject will pass that test, sbandrews (t) 14:49, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
OK. So what do you think to the Geohack idea ? DJ Barney 23:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline of first orbital launches by nationality

It's a featured list, but there are still I think some serious definitional issues that remain to be worked out. Please see my comments at Talk:Timeline of first orbital launches by nationality. Thanks.--Pharos 06:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing redundent sections

I intend to remove such redundant sections from mission related articles. Would there be any objection to this? A new section is unnecessary for a sentence (OK its actually half a sentence) -- Cat chi? 16:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I totally support this kind of edit. First, because the sections aren't necessary. Second, because they add layout clutter. Third, because I don't like wikilinks in section titles. Converting these to be bold-but-not-section headings solves all these issues! (sdsds - talk) 16:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Missing Articles

I just thought I'd mention that User:Skysmith/Missing topics about Astronomy has a great list of missing space related articles and might be a good place to look if anyone is interested in helping to create new articles. Vsst 01:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Potential consolidation of some list articles

The following articles have a lot of overlap, and I wonder if there is scope for consolidation:

It wouldn't surprise me much if there were other similar lists kicking around too. (If you know of any others, then maybe you could add them to Template:Space exploration lists and timelines.)

There has been some discussion about individual merge proposals on some of the talk pages of these articles, but none seems to be very actively progressing towards a conclusion, and none seems to be considering all of the above lists together. Because so many articles are affected, I'm bringing it here in case anyone wants to run with it. I certainly think that six articles is too many. The only article that I've had much to do with personally is List of planetary probes (which, incidentally, I think is misnamed). I believe that one is reasonably complete and accurate but I wouldn't know about the others. Thoughts anyone? Matt 01:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC).

I see another list has popped up now, again with very significant overlap:
Matt 18:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Space elevator FAR nomination

Space elevator has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Qblik talk 20:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great Comet of 1882

Great Comet of 1882 is currently under review at Wikipedia:Good article review. If any members would like help keep this a good article please see the comments on the Good article review page. T Rex | talk 19:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: 3 March 2007 lunar eclipse and 28 August 2007 lunar eclipse

Are individual lunar eclipses notable enough that they should have individual Wikipedia articles?

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/28 August 2007 lunar eclipse. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Peter G Werner 22:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expert needed

List of private spaceflight companies is in need of help from someone who knows the subject well — Jack · talk · 21:27, Wednesday, 29 August 2007

[edit] Infobox

Hello there. Is there a version of Template:Infobox Space mission that would be appropriate for X-15 Flight 91 and similar articles? Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 12:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notice of List articles

Page(s) related to this project have been created and/or added to one of the Wikipedia:Contents subpages (not by me).

This note is to let you know, so that experts in the field can expand them and check them for accuracy, and so that they can be added to any watchlists/tasklists, and have any appropriate project banners added, etc. Thanks. --Quiddity 19:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MESUR

MESUR (Mars Environmental Survey) program seems to be missing. 132.205.99.122 22:00, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delta-v (physics) for deletion

Delta-v (physics) has been nominated for deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delta-v (physics). A suggestion has been made to perhaps merge with Delta-v, the orbital dynamics article. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 22:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Astrosociobiology at AFD

Astrosociobiology has been nominated for deletion. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Surface features of celestial bodies

categories of Surface features of celestial bodies has been nominated to rename from cat:X on Y to cat:X of Y. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 9#Surface features of celestial bodies 132.205.99.122 (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greenspun illustration project: requests now open

Dear Wikimedians,

This is a (belated) announcement that requests are now being taken for illustrations to be created for the Philip Greenspun illustration project (PGIP).

The aim of the project is to create and improve illustrations on Wikimedia projects. You can help by identifying which important articles or concepts are missing illustrations (diagrams) that could make them a lot easier to understand. Requests should be made on this page: Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project/Requests

If there's a topic area you know a lot about or are involved with as a Wikiproject, why not conduct a review to see which illustrations are missing and needed for that topic? Existing content can be checked by using Mayflower to search Wikimedia Commons, or use the Free Image Search Tool to quickly check for images of a given topic in other-language projects.

The community suggestions will be used to shape the final list, which will be finalised to 50 specific requests for Round 1, due to start in January. People will be able to make suggestions for the duration of the project, not just in the lead-up to Round 1.

thanks, pfctdayelise (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC) (Project coordinator)

[edit] Astronomy collaboration of the week

Hi. I've noticed that the astronomy collaboration of the week, currently under the jurisdiction of the Astronomical objects project, has had the same collaboration since July 2006. I am therefore proposing that it be expanded to cover space as a general topic, and be moved to the jurisdiction of this WikiProject. Please discuss this proposal on the collaboration talk page. Thanks. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Again a good idea I think. Takes somewhat after the idea of Taskforces in that some procedures should be centralized, whereas groups of editors can be decentralized. Moving COTW to WP:SPACE and deal with mulitple types of space related articles seems like a good way to keep more people involved, making for a more stable procedure. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 01:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I've implemented the proposal, so the collaboration is now this project's responsibility. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Space/Collaboration. I've suspended the collaboration for the rest of the week to allow it to be brought up to standard (there isn't much point in having a collaboration for two days), and set an automatic update sequence, so it will be less likely to stay on the same article for a year and a half, like the last one. Maybe we should distribute links around the portals. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 11:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The History of the Names of the Planets

The history is screwed up. On the saturn page it says saturn is the greek name when it is the roman name.(also saturday comes from the god not the planet) not sure if it is wrong on others but i thought id pitch in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LegendLiver (talk • contribs) 01:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Apollo 8

Apollo 8 has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

[edit] Proposal to merge Portal:Space exploration into Portal:Spaceflight

Hi, I have proposed that these two portals are merged, as there is too much overlap between them, and Space Exploration is being too general in its content. Please could you look at, and comment on the proposal, which is located here. I am posting this on the talk pages of all interested WikiProjects. All feedback is greatly appreciated. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 19:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to merge three child WikiProjects

Discussion is located on the Human Spaceflight project's talk page

I'm just notifying a couple of the parent projects of a proposal to merge WikiProject Space missions and WikiProject Space travellers into Wikipedia:WikiProject Human Spaceflight. Please leave comments and questions on the Human spaceflight project's talk page. Thanks --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Solar System

Solar system portal has been listed on featured portal removal candidates list because it fails to be well-maintained. Please give your input at the removal page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 09:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roche limit

Anyone here know what the Roche limit is? Roche limit has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

[edit] Reminder of the Philip Greenspun Illustration project

Hi. You may be familiar with the Philip Greenspun Illustration Project. $20,000 has been donated to pay for the creation of high quality diagrams for Wikipedia and its sister projects.

Requests are currently being taken at m:Philip Greenspun illustration project/Requests and input from members of this project would be very welcome. If you can think of any diagrams (not photos or maps) that would be useful then I encourage you to suggest them at this page. If there is any free content material that would assist in drawing the diagram then it would be great if you could list that, too.

If there are any related (or unrelated) WikiProjects you think might have some suggestions then please pass this request over. Thanks. --Cherry blossom tree 16:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 14

An IPer has added mulitple paragraphs of probably good information but with no refs, no external links, admitted personal accounts in the description line, and without good format. I marked it with 3 templates for immediate attention. If article not update by the IP editor or another wiki-editor in a reasonable amount of time I recommend all the updates be reverted. LanceBarber (talk) 02:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article listed for deletion

There's opportunity for discussion of this article at AFD. Coffee4me (talk) 02:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of space telescopes

I should probably have mentioned a few days ago that List of space telescopes is a Featured List Candidate. Comments are welcome. Mike Peel (talk) 20:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of space agencies

I'm currently rewriting List of space agencies such that it is actually a list, rather than a series of summary sections; see User:Mike Peel/List of space agencies. My plan is to get the list up to Featured List status. I have a few queries about the article, however, which I could do with some input on:

  • Should just the English names of the agencies be listed, or also the native language name?
  • Some agencies seem to change their names fairly often: should these be listed individually, or just a single entry listed?
  • What exactly defines an Agency? Is it a standalone government department? Is is when a section of a department related to space exploration was created? e.g. [5] says that the Brazilian Space Agency was originally the "Planetarium Division established under the Prime Minister’s Department", then "Space Science Studies (BAKSA) established with extended sphere of responsibilities it was envisioned to undertake. ", before the "National Space Agency (ANGKASA)" was estabished. Should just the last one of these be listed (which is what currently happens), or all of them?

Thanks, Mike Peel (talk) 21:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAR for Hubble Space Telescope

Hubble Space Telescope has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Kaypoh (talk) 05:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rocket article titles

I have proposed a large number of moves and other changes to clean up the mess that is caused by the lack of any accepted disambiguation standard for rocket articles. The proposal is located at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rocketry/Titles --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 08:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

As part of the above proposal, there is discussion on moving M-100 (rocket) on top of M-100 70.55.84.13 (talk) 05:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of ISS spacewalks

I have nominated the page for Featured List Removal (it's not part of this project, but it probably should be). Feel free to comment here. -- Scorpion0422 21:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] International Year of Astronomy 2009

2009 has been proclaimed as the International Year of Astronomy. It would be great to tie in with this, both to help with the aims of the international year and to spur extra improvements to Wikipedia's coverage of astronomy. I've started a thread about this over at WikiProject Astronomy; please have a look and join in with the conversation. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rings of Uranus

I submitted this article for a peer review. You can comment here. Ruslik (talk) 08:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dextre

I noticed that there are a couple of good snaps of Dextre - the ISS robot arm released in the last few months by NASA on APOD. Can some add them to the wikipage - April 1 and June 11. June 11 snap can also be nominated for FP. --192.8.222.82 (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)