:Both Wikipedia and NASA strive for gender-neutral terms:[https://history.nasa.gov/printFriendly/styleguide.html]. [[User:BatteryIncluded|BatteryIncluded]] ([[User talk:BatteryIncluded|talk]]) 15:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
:Both Wikipedia and NASA strive for gender-neutral terms:[https://history.nasa.gov/printFriendly/styleguide.html]. [[User:BatteryIncluded|BatteryIncluded]] ([[User talk:BatteryIncluded|talk]]) 15:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
:For myself, I prefer the term "crewed spaceflight", as it is gender neutral and avoids political correctness at the same time. People like Buzz Aldrin don't dispute that he was a crew member of Apollo 11, and side steps any controversy at all. On top of that, you could even in theory use Sputnik 2 as an example of crewed spaceflight, even though it wasn't "human spaceflight". --[[User:Robert Horning|Robert Horning]] ([[User talk:Robert Horning|talk]]) 14:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
I wonder if I could suggest that we make a move to reduce use of terms like "manned spaceflight" in favour of something more inclusive such as "human spaceflight" or "crewed missions".
I know it might not sound much to some of you, but it does make a difference, and if that doesn't sway you, then perhaps the fact that "human spaceflight" is now the spaceflight sector's standard term. NASA, ESA and many media style guides all state that "human" or "crewed" should be used these days.
Update on this, I got AWB all figured out and am planning to mass-edit our articles to conform to this, by changing manned/unmanned to crewed/uncrewed, unless consensus says not to. Does anyone have any objections before I make a few thousand changes? I will wait seven days for comments. Thanks! Kees08 (Talk)22:31, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the motivation, however I think we should not retroactively change vocabulary. "Manned spaceflight" or "human spaceflight" has been a cultural symbol for decades; suddenly calling it "crewed spaceflight" because 21st-century polite society is wary of any gendered word would be anachronistic. We should rather follow the vocabulary used by contemporary sources: for those events where most WP:RS refer to "crewed" flights, then we can use that word, otherwise keep them "manned". — JFGtalk22:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I support using "human spaceflight" in place of "manned spaceflight" (except for specific historical references, as the NASA style guide points out), but not "crewed spaceflight". That is not a common term, unlike human spaceflight. Unless there's overwhelming support otherwise, I think following that NASA document is the most neutral way of handling this. Also, Wikipedia also commonly uses "robotic" to refer to such missions, and I see no reason to change this. — Huntster (t@c)00:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@JustinTime55: I will try to get into more detail later today, but for your second point, AWB stands for AutoWikiBrowser, which I am really just using as a fancy find and replace machine. I see and review each individual change before committing the edit. Long story short: I will make sure that whatever we end up deciding on (looks like we are leaning towards human, I have some examples where that would sound awkward we can work through) that I do not alter quotes. Kees08 (Talk)18:44, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have been trying to improve the article on Reusable launch systems. There are a lot of mentions of stillborn or vapourware projects. No doubt some of these are more significant than others, but I have not edited enough spaceflight articles to have a feel for which, if any, should be deleted as lacking any significant coverage in reliable sources. Any help or guidance would be appreciated. Please post any replies to the relevant article talk page topic. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For myself, I prefer the term "crewed spaceflight", as it is gender neutral and avoids political correctness at the same time. People like Buzz Aldrin don't dispute that he was a crew member of Apollo 11, and side steps any controversy at all. On top of that, you could even in theory use Sputnik 2 as an example of crewed spaceflight, even though it wasn't "human spaceflight". --Robert Horning (talk) 14:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
