Jump to content

Talk:DearMoon project

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Robert Horning (talk | contribs) at 16:06, 22 September 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

There's a good chance this won't happen

Therefore let's not write this article as though any of this is guaranteed. Use "is planned for" rather than "will". FOARP (talk) 07:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it won't happen at all: [1]. BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:53, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Or, it will be launched with the BFR instead. BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good call Mchcopl (talk) 13:07, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mission not cancelled

Musk never cancelled this space tourism mission, he just said that Falcon Heavy will not be used for crewed flights. Now, this mission is likely to be carried out by the Big Falcon Rocket. So it's probably wrong that it wouldn't be planned anymore, it seems to be still on track. --212.186.7.98 (talk) 07:53, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


If the mission is launched instead with he BFR, then the update requires that you delete the use of the Dragon capsule, Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9. BatteryIncluded (talk) 12:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The modified Dragon capsule is still gonna be used, only the carrier rocket will be changed. --212.186.7.98 (talk) 15:46, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If Musk is using the BFR for the lunar tourism, then he is not using the Dragon 2. That should be updated/deleted. Rowan Forest (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, this sounds like just personal speculation. Unless we have a good source for the BFR plan, we should not mention it. — JFG talk 19:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What sounds like speculation is to launch the BFR with something else that it was designed for: 1) At the top of the BFR is the Big Falcon Spaceship. 2) “We kind of tabled the Crew Dragon on Falcon Heavy in favor of focusing our energy on BFR.” Rowan Forest (talk) 19:40, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
no longer just speculation, after the announcement last night^ref it has been confirmed this is the same customer, same plan just a different more capable vehicle Stepbot (talk) 15:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The speculation by that user was launching the Dragon capsule on a BFR. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry struggling with the indentation here... I agree that "The modified Dragon capsule is still gonna be used, only the carrier rocket will be changed." is wild, unfounded, and incorrect speculation. Thought you were referring to "If the mission is launched instead with he BFR, then the update requires that you delete the use of the Dragon capsule, Falcon Heavy and Falcon 9" Stepbot (talk) 16:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mission now on BFR, more Sep 17

SpaceX has signed the world’s first private passenger to fly around the Moon aboard our BFR launch vehicle—an important step toward enabling access for everyday people who dream of traveling to space. Find out who’s flying and why on Monday, September 17.. --mfb (talk) 01:30, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 September 2018

Discussion

SpaceX lunar tourism mission → dearMoon Project – Yusaku Maezawa's name for the mission and its associated projects, which I'd imagine would come under the scope of this article. The official website can be found here. The true name is #dearMoon Project, but the pound sign would have to be ommitted due to technical issues. A {{Correct title}} hatnote would be used to indicate this at the top of the article. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 02:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the flight is a part of the project, not all of it. After they create their art, they will expose/perform. Question: Is it SpaceX's flight or Maezawa's? Rowan Forest (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rowan Forest: There wouldn't be a need to split the articles into different parts of the project, so I'd imagine everything involved in the project, the SpaceX-operated flight included, would come under the scope of this single article. Also, throughout the presentation, both Musk and Maezawa stressed that Maezawa fully funded the flight and chose SpaceX to launch it. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 03:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My intent was to begin discussions to define, from the perspective of Wikipedia, if the central subject will be the mission architecture, rocket performance, etc. as done with other space missions, or if to focus on DearMoon Project (which is my inclination at this point) and include the technical aspects of the flight as a near secondary subject of this art project. Rowan Forest (talk) 03:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is revolutionary from the spaceflight aspect on its own. This is not the 186th flight of some rocket where we can just focus on the mission of the spacecraft. --mfb (talk) 03:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rowan Forest: The article is currently only seventeen sentences long, and considering the lack of information there is on the entire project as a whole, let alone the flight itself, at this stage, I doubt there'll be a need to split the article into two or more for a long time to come. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 03:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Rowan Forest: What we are dealing with, currently, is the particular lunar flyby mission, which is called dearMoon project. The SpaceX BFR is just a [significant] part of this project. When and if there are other BFR flights to the Moon, a proper Wikipedia page is to be created, I think. Igor Krein (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think we all agree in that the scope of this article is to be focused on dearMoon Project. That means to delete the section "2017 announcement" and re-write the rest. Rowan Forest (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why throw away history? I think retitle the page to focus on dearMoon but I think despite how little information there is about the project circa 2017, that was still the first stages of the project and should be told as such.Stepbot (talk) 13:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If he was the secret client in 2017, then yes. Rowan Forest (talk) 14:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Elon confirmed it in an answer to a question asked by ABC in the Q&A time of the announcement. If you didnt watch it or at least read a transcript of it I would recommend doing so as it is at this time a primary source for this page. r/SpaceX has a nice summary thread of it on reddit if you need to get up to speed. Stepbot (talk) 15:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support/Oppose

  • Support - Rename and change to a style similar to an article about a satellite: includes description about the launch, but mainly focuses on the mission/results (e.g. the art exhibition) XYZt (talk) 15:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Neither the engineering or the artistic side of this project are well understood in any detail yet, and both would be stubs individually. For now, they should remain as a single article with a clear, descriptive but generic title. Later, when more is known, the artistic side to the project can be split off as DearMoon Project, and the engineering side as BFR Flight XX. Anxietycello (talk) 17:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — the mission has been notable for a couple of years, and passed WP:GNC a long time ago. Now, with the mission having a specific focus and a payload and a sponsoring purchaser of payload services form a launch service provider, the article should clearly pickup the name of the primary payload, just as has been our policy in spaceflight articles for a long time. We've discussed and settled on this as a general practice in the Spaceflight WikiProject as well. Cheers. N2e (talk) 23:27, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the name for the project has been formally announced along with who is paying for it all. While it was anonymous in terms of the project sponsors it made sense for a more generic title, but that time has passed. It has always been about a singular project and I haven't seen that change in terms of some group like Space Adventures signing up a whole series of flights. There is also zero reason to distinguish the spacecraft from the artistic project since it is all rolled up together and being purchased with the same funds. If the spacecraft itself is named (Elon Musk suggested naming the first vehicle "Heart of Gold" more than once), that can be split into a separate article... especially if it is used in multiple noteworthy missions/flights. I agree that the hashtag is not necessary in the naming convention here either, and likely won't be used in press reports beyond the initial descriptions. --Robert Horning (talk) 04:02, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — All human spaceflight missions have an article named after the mission. In this case the mission is called "DearMoon" not "Apollo 11", but the same logic applies. The DearMoon Mission will fly on a SpaceX BFR Rocket in a similar way the Apollo 11 mission flew on a NASA Saturn V rocket. There are already articles on SpaceX and BFR, this article is about the mission and should follow existing naming conventions. If DearMoon becomes a multi-mission project like Project Apollo, then a separate page on the larger project can be created.
  • Support — SpaceX lunar tourism mission is not specific enough. It has already been given a name by Yusaku. "DearMoon" is a better name. I don't think it should be called "dearMoon" or "#dearMoon", because that seems like a Twitter thing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mchcopl (talk • contribs) 12:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wording

Although it is not 7 days yet, it looks like there is a strong consensus to move the page name, but there are a few close variations proposed, so lets refine the exact wording. #dearMoon seems to have no traction, as it is a Tweeter handle. The other proposed names are:

  • DearMoon
  • DearMoon Project
  • dearMoon
  • dearMoon Project
  • #dearMoon
  • #dearMoon Project

I tend to favor the simplicity of DearMoon, per JFG argument above. Your thoughts? Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 22:47, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rowan Forest: As I had mentioned in my original nomination paragraph, the pound sign has to be omitted because of technical restrictions; the pound sign is used on MediaWiki for specific purposes, such as a URL tool to get to certain points on a page. If included in a title, it would basically break the URL and default to Wikipedia's Main Page. So to correct the record, "#dearMoon" was omitted as an option not because "[has] no traction", but because it is technically impossible for the page title to be that. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 02:07, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 02:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The website uses "#dearMoon" everywhere. We keep the capital M so I think we should also keep the small d. For technical reasons the page has to start with a capital letter but we can use {{lowercase title}} and use a small d everywhere in the article. I suggest dearMoon, with a headnote about the "#". --mfb (talk) 07:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with dearMoon enabled by {{lowercase title}}. — JFG talk 13:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note that we could also use {{Correct title|#dearMoon}} if the name with hashtag is deemed to be the 'correct' name . Rosbif73 (talk) 14:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would put alternatives as redirects and definitely in the lead paragraph, but I would personally suggest sticking with DearMoon Project as the article title itself. Reliable 3rd party sources like Motherboard are using the form Dear Moon Project without the hashtag and including a space. It would be interesting to compare other sources before trying to copy the crazy twitter hashtag in terms of naming conventions. --Robert Horning (talk) 16:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DearMoon_project&oldid=860720849"