Jump to content

Talk:International Space Station: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Mcvoorhis (talk | contribs)
Add information pointing to a reliable source of ISS Orbital Speed data, in response to the "failed verification" notice in the ISS summary information. I fear if I make the edits I may make a mistake and screw up a "level-4 vital article in technology." I feel much safer in the "talk" area.
Line 156: Line 156:
:::::@[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]] added as per your request. Adding refs to infobox is a bit hard so forbade in earlier edits [[Special:Contributions/122.187.144.98|122.187.144.98]] ([[User talk:122.187.144.98|talk]]) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]] added as per your request. Adding refs to infobox is a bit hard so forbade in earlier edits [[Special:Contributions/122.187.144.98|122.187.144.98]] ([[User talk:122.187.144.98|talk]]) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
::::::@[[Special:Contributions/122.187.144.98|122.187.144.98]]: That's much better, thanks for making that change. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
::::::@[[Special:Contributions/122.187.144.98|122.187.144.98]]: That's much better, thanks for making that change. <span class="nowrap">—[[User:TechnoSquirrel69|TechnoSquirrel69]]</span> ([[User talk:TechnoSquirrel69|sigh]]) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

==Orbital Speed -- verifiable data source==

As of 28 September 2023 the "Orbital Speed" data in the summary area of this article says "7.66 km/s [failed verification]." The warning has existed since May of 2021. I propose altering the reference for the ISS Orbital Speed, but I lack the confidence to jump in and make the change including the reference -- I've tried doing this before with destructive (well, "not pretty") results.

The NASA "ISS Trajectory Data" page here: https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/trajectory_data.cfm
has stable and self-updating pointers to ISS orbital ephemera. The ephemera are multiline files listing the position (x,y,z in km) and velocity (x,y,z in km/s) of the ISS at various times (in UTC). The ephemera may be downloaded at any time and the data there used to derive a velocity from the ephemera. The last line of the current (18 September 2023, 8.17PM EDT in the USA) ephemera file lists the ISS velocity as (x=6.80373806186271 km/s y=1.09358525028292 km/s z=-3.35652091564667 km/s).

The net velocity is sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + z^2); substituting the numbers from the last line of the ephemera file we get 7.66505 km/s as an orbital speed, which agrees well with the speed in the summary.

I propose leaving the orbital speed alone, and changing the reference for orbital speed to be the NASA "ISS Trajectory Data" page, mentioned above. [[User:Mcvoorhis|Mcvoorhis]] ([[User talk:Mcvoorhis|talk]]) 00:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:26, 19 September 2023

Template:Vital article

Former featured articleInternational Space Station is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 23, 2010.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 21, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
September 12, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
October 11, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
January 21, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 16, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
June 29, 2008Good article reassessmentDelisted
November 25, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
December 7, 2008Good article nomineeListed
December 20, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 3, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
March 10, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 28, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
July 21, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 23, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
January 12, 2010Featured article candidatePromoted
July 15, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
September 12, 2011Featured article reviewDemoted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on February 27, 2004.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 2, 2004, November 2, 2005, November 2, 2006, November 2, 2007, November 2, 2008, November 2, 2009, November 2, 2010, and November 20, 2013.
Current status: Former featured article

film section update

didn't the Russians film some movie called "Вызов", or something like that, on the ISS? I'm not sure what became of that, could have just been some junk direct-to-video movie but it still might be worth a mention. Plus the planned movie involving Tom Cruise, if that's still happening Binglederry (talk) 01:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Challenge_(2023_film) , it actually comes out in 7 days. I'll come back and edit this in if nobody else does Binglederry (talk) 01:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for my edits considered as disruption

In List of International Space Station spacewalks page the whole thing with refs is provided about outfitting of nauka. I was just updating this article as i did back in past. It is clearly visible that there was a flaw in this page on considering all mlm outfittings as pressurized but only airlock shk is pressurized. I was completing that but page rollbackers unknowingly reverted everytime. Below is the text from spacewalks page.

VKD-56

Ninth in a series of spacewalks to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. The spacewalkers used ERA to pick up the radiator with the arm and relocated it to Nauka at the end of the spacewalk. The spacewalkers closed valves on the nitrogen jumpers, removed covers over the nitrogen jumpers, disconnected the radiator heater cable and capped it, removed bolts and launch restraints, and transferred the radiator over to Nauka and installed it into a socket on the forward face where it will be deployed at the end of EVA 4. As part of get-ahead tasks, the spacewalkers prepared the airlock for transfer to Nauka on the next spacewalk and stowed the ERA adapter on the airlock. Because of time and issues with matting the radiator the task to jettison the covers was moved to the next spacewalk. This was the longest spacewalk of this expedition and a critical one to get the lab activated.

VKD-57

Tenth in a series of spacewalks to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. Prokopyev and Petelin removed bolts and covers, disconnected cables and used ERA to transfer the airlock over to Nauka, where it was installed on the forward facing port. Once the airlock was installed, they mated cables and jettisoned their trash, which included hardware and covers from the previous spacewalks and this spacewalk. The spacewalk faced a delay when ERA entered an uncontrolled roll, placing the airlock out of alignment. Prokopyev and Petelin improvised with a little elbow grease, rotated the airlock into the correct position and got it latched in place. The spacewalk faced another delay when tape was found on the electrical connectors, requiring Prokopyev to cut it before the cables were connected.

VKD-58

Eleventh and final spacewalk to outfit Nauka and to prepare ERA for operations. To wrap up work on Nauka, the cosmonauts deployed the radiator, and installed nitrogen and ammonia jumpers to cool the Russian Segment and connected the radiator to electrical power, hydraulics, and mechanical connections. As a getahead task while the radiator was being filled with coolant the cosmonauts installed gap spanners on ERA's boom to allow for translation on future spacewalks.

I plead to restore my version instead of expecting a edit-revert-edit scenario or give me nod or clearance to restore my version.

I know what and how to write on wiki. I have made the Expedition 69 page. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Btw it's not mentioned but actually we can count Russian and us evas separatel. Russian evas are VKDs 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1149978471&oldid=1149849752 are some of the edits like this before with full acceptance 103.27.142.111 (talk) 09:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Geomodelrailroader can you express your views and restore my version at my last edit as seen in the history of this page????? You can understand why i edited and what i edited (you know the topic as you were the writer of spacewalks in iss spacewalks page). If you think i was right, do the needful to restore please!🙏!🙏!🙏!🙏!🙏! 103.27.142.111 (talk) 13:25, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is the source of your urgency here? 331dot (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
sources like https://www.space.com/international-space-station-spacewalk-russian-radiator-may-2023 and
https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacestation/2023/05/12/cosmonauts-begin-spacewalk-to-deploy-radiator/ 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:36, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
this is out of my hands once I upload the article. Lately you have been conducting vandalism which is why you got reverted. On the ISS Page you used Tweets which is a no no and you did not source your work I keep telling people that. Tweets are not sources and articles from magazines cannot be used as sources because of the subscription lock. All sources need to be from NASA, Ruscosmos, Space.com, or from ESA or Jaxa in their original language sources can not contain irrelevant tweets, they cannot contain articles from Anatoli Zek or his website Russian Spaceweb or from the European channel Space Affairs. anything from here will be removed and reverted. Even I have to deal with the editors it is out of my hands once the content goes up. Geomodelrailroader (talk) 07:42, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm have no opinion on the current edit war, but surely articles from magazines cannot be used as sources because of the subscription lock sounds wrong. Articles from reliable peer-reviewed journals can be locked, but the can be used as sources! The New York Times (for example) also require subscription, but it certainly can be used as a source. Artem.G (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for late response @Artem.G @Geomodelrailroader (blocked for a week) but i need to say that refs used from other cites are done by previous editors. As you see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1154565744&oldid=1154565441 103.27.142.111 (talk) 03:29, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Next i was just activating mlm outfittings. We employ separate colours for non operational and operational modules in the iss structure. There i found a flaw that mlm outfittings under pressurized section contains all of mlm outfittings where you know correctly, except mlm experiments airlock Shk is only pressurized. So i just took out mlm airlock from Nauka's description section's subsection and sent all others to unpressurized section. This subsection as per history was translated from the ru-wiki version of nauka page. I just added a ref for VKD-58 spacewalk from Anatoly Zak's page but i can easily remove it with a nasa one. This means i was clearly just updated article and nothing else. I wanted to express myself but no-one was understanding and claining me as a vandalist🤧🤧🤧🤧🤧. @Artem.G@Geomodelrailroader 103.27.142.111 (talk) 03:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would be better if i get the nod to do my work here (page here has page review rights so this confusion) 103.27.142.111 (talk) 03:38, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
okay but we are trying to help you next time please do not use tweets it is unprofessional and tweets are irrelevant. Geomodelrailroader (talk) 09:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Look I'm trying to be professional here this website is supposed to be an encyclopedia. Lately unconfirmed users are plagiarizing articles or using tweets as sources. Wiki rules say you can't do that all articles need to be sourced and tweets are irrelevant. We don't use tweets on articles the reason for the debate is we had an unconfirmed user uses a tweet from Anatoli Zek instead of an article as the source and the link went to a twitter user who has since been banned by Elon Musk. We don't use tweets in articles it is unreliable and not a creditable source. Geomodelrailroader (talk) 09:21, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Geomodelrailroader bro i understood your point you are stressing on this tweet. To bring to your note, i just added a Russian space web that i showed and assured that when i am allowed to post again i will add a ref like nasa.gov. regarding that tweet it an olden ref addition here for 6 months and not my addition. Additionally i just did shifting that doesn't require refs. So is this issue resolved????? 103.27.142.111 (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just follow your spacewalk page. If ref i rare i will pick from that @Geomodelrailroader 103.27.142.111 (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
when you can edit again source his page do not source Twitter, we have a strict No Tweets rule at Wikipedia and all Wiki pages the reason being is Tweets are unreliable sources. If you read a tweet source the article not the tweet. Geomodelrailroader (talk) 16:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We don't actually have a strict no tweets rule. This is outlined at WP:TWITTER - essentially, it's treated like any other self-published source. Not valid for contentious claims, but if the author is a subject matter expert, writing about their area of expertise, it can be used for uncontentious material. Just sayin' - I haven't looked into this content dispute at all. Girth Summit (blether) 16:57, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Beauty School Dropout what's the problem now????? I have started reason in this talk page discussion, so what was the error from my side. 103.56.239.113 (talk) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
topic for your involvement @beauty school dropout 103.56.239.113 (talk) 07:29, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Geomodelrailroader can you write in the way you like, my versions are reverted repeatedly. (Don't necessarily meaning i need the same thing i wrote, but just for betterment of this article, even the fact that Axiom Mission 2 has launched is getting reverted when i did these things earlier very casually https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=1149978471&oldid=1149849752 (needed refs, i will provide)) 103.56.239.113 (talk) 09:13, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
okey just trying to be professional. Geomodelrailroader (talk) 18:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Beauty School Dropout please answer 103.27.142.111 (talk) 15:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seasider53 highlight my flaws i will remain quiet. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&oldid=1156509429 103.27.142.111 (talk) 07:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Seasider53 block is wrong as i have to update page listed on Lists of astronauts after Shenzhou 16 launch to Tiangong space station. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 07:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is highlighting what my edits lack and make them different from signed up users 🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺😭😭😭😭😭 (very of my annoyance and depression) 103.27.142.111 (talk) 08:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Manticore (embarrassing to call an individual) or someone else can you intervene this matter????? Everyone is telling i am wrong but not why i am wrong. Those who said here i have changed my edits in their way but problem persists!!!!! 103.27.142.111 (talk) 10:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ant 24.210.25.160 (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ant?????@24.210.25.160 103.27.142.111 (talk) 16:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
please allow me to do shifting of mlm unpressurized outfittings from pressurized to unpressurized section. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 14:31, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Space_Station&diff=prev&oldid=1156509429 this is the needed edit. Every time it gets reverted, unknowingly. This is a faithful edit. 103.27.142.111 (talk) 14:48,
 Not done for now: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Lightoil (talk) 02:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors

I've again reverted edits by an anonymous user because they remove referenced material, and remove a reference definition, while adding new unreferenced material. Note that the reference "rsw-2021" is used elsewhere in the article, and the removal of its definition adds a referencing error to the article and places the article in . Feel free to bring back the new material, but it should be referenced -- and should be placed without disrupting existing content. -- Mikeblas (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Iss updates listed at NSF

Adding iss updates here as i cannot list them in edit summary June 9 13:15-19:45 - spacewalk (ISS U.S. EVA-87) from Quest airlock (Install iROSA 1A on the starboard truss) [Bowen, Hoburg] June 15 13:20-19:50 - spacewalk (ISS U.S. EVA-88) from Quest airlock (Install iROSA 1B on the starboard truss) [Bowen, Hoburg] June - spacewalk (ISS Russian EVA-59) [Equipment R&R / SM Inspection] [Prokopyev, Petelin] NET Early July - Crew Dragon Endeavour [C206.4] (Crew-6/USCV-6) undocking (from Harmony PMA 2 / IDA-F) [Exp 70: Bowen, Hoburg, Al Neyadi, Fedyaev] NET July 21 - CST-100 Starliner Calypso (Boe-CFT) launch [Wilmore, Williams] July - Cygnus "S.S. Laurel Clark" (NG-19) launch July - spacewalk (ISS Russian EVA-60) from MIM2 Poisk Module (Portable workstation transfer from MRM-1 to MLM by the ERA. MMOD shielding) [Prokopyev, Petelin] August 17 - Crew Dragon (Crew-7/USCV-7) launch [Exp 70: Moghbeli, Mogensen, Furukawa, Borisov] August 21 - Progress MS-22 (83P) undocking (from Zvezda) August 23 - Progress MS-24 (85P) launch 103.56.239.66 (talk) 05:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32006.3300 103.56.239.66 (talk) 05:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
reason for eva driven is irosa coming on 4 June to iss 103.56.239.66 (talk) 05:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

About changing the crew members

@122.187.144.98: I have reverted your edit again; please do not edit the article before participating in this discussion. Leaving a link in your edit summary is not sufficient for verifiability. Please include a citation in the article when making changes in the future. For this particular edit, I recommend that you establish consensus with other editors here before implementing it. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rad my talk page discussion i wlnt like to paste stuff here again 122.187.144.98 (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@122.187.144.98: I have read that discussion; the point is the same. Wikipedia requires citations in the article, not in edit summaries. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSquirrel69 but where to add when that thing is getting removed 122.187.144.98 (talk) 16:54, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@122.187.144.98: I think the entry in the infobox where the crew is mentioned is a natural place for something like this. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSquirrel69 added as per your request. Adding refs to infobox is a bit hard so forbade in earlier edits 122.187.144.98 (talk) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@122.187.144.98: That's much better, thanks for making that change. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orbital Speed -- verifiable data source

As of 28 September 2023 the "Orbital Speed" data in the summary area of this article says "7.66 km/s [failed verification]." The warning has existed since May of 2021. I propose altering the reference for the ISS Orbital Speed, but I lack the confidence to jump in and make the change including the reference -- I've tried doing this before with destructive (well, "not pretty") results.

The NASA "ISS Trajectory Data" page here: https://spotthestation.nasa.gov/trajectory_data.cfm has stable and self-updating pointers to ISS orbital ephemera. The ephemera are multiline files listing the position (x,y,z in km) and velocity (x,y,z in km/s) of the ISS at various times (in UTC). The ephemera may be downloaded at any time and the data there used to derive a velocity from the ephemera. The last line of the current (18 September 2023, 8.17PM EDT in the USA) ephemera file lists the ISS velocity as (x=6.80373806186271 km/s y=1.09358525028292 km/s z=-3.35652091564667 km/s).

The net velocity is sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + z^2); substituting the numbers from the last line of the ephemera file we get 7.66505 km/s as an orbital speed, which agrees well with the speed in the summary.

I propose leaving the orbital speed alone, and changing the reference for orbital speed to be the NASA "ISS Trajectory Data" page, mentioned above. Mcvoorhis (talk) 00:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]