|Aerospace engineering was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aerospace engineering article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Aerospace engineering has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I would disagree with the assertion in the lead that 'Aerospace engineering is often informally called rocket science,' especially based on the definition that appears in the lead for aerospace engineering and the distinction between astro- and aeronautical engineering given. The term 'rocket science' generally only refers to rockets and loosely anything that goes into space, but I've never heard it refer to anything that flies. While there still seems to be some discussion above, I feel it would be safe to remove this sentence, considering it may further confuse the definition and adds very little and fits poorly. --Fourth Planet (talk) 11:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- In further exploration of this page and related (Rocket Science, Aeronautics, Astronautics) there is some contradiction on the meaning of various terms. It seems a decision on the meaning of these terms needs to be made and implemented. --Fourth Planet (talk) 12:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Aerospace engineering covers Both astro and aeronautical eng. So rocket science is within the astronautical part. You can tag the sentence with a fact tag if you like. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Science plays a role in some space missions in the analysis of data gathered by the spacecraft. Such spacecraft are called 'probes' because they are probing for such scientific data. But the article is not about science. It is about engineering. A person who designs rocket boosters or the spacecraft they carry is an engineer, not a scientist. While scientists strive to uncover the laws of nature, engineers take that knowledge and exploit it - building things that serve practical purposes. I've edited the article to shed light on this common misnomer, citing a NASA history of MSFC as one reference.
- I hope all students who declare aerospace engineering as their major are taught on day one that if they want to be a scientist, they've chosen the wrong major. There's no such thing as a "rocket scientist"! Now a rocket can be used to help scientists do their thing, but those people are called "astrophysicists", or members of some such field of planetary science. An aerospace engineer who is a scientist is a person with a second job.--Tdadamemd (talk) 06:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
- Tdadamemd, Wikipedia does not prescribe how words ought to be used. It is a fact that the term rocket science is used as a rough synonym for aerospace engineering in American vernacular English. Whether it's truly science is irrelevant to the point, because the people who use the term rocket science are generally laypeople anyway. MarcusMaximus (talk) 00:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Rocket science not science ?!?! Aside from natural sciences, there´s social sciences and the sciences of the artificial, where engineering artifacts can be studied, along with companies, farms and everything that was built by man. In fact, the study of man-made algorithms is called computer science. See Simon´s "The sciences of the artificial" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:45, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
These two references provide the connection between rocket science and aerospace engineering:
It doesn`t take a rocket scientist to fiigure that out.
Semi-protect this article?
It seems that this article has been vandalized quite frequently (at least once a week), and seems like it might be neccessary to semi-protect it to prevent vandalism from continuing. Any thoughts? Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 17:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure this is frequent enough for protecting an article, but it is worth asking about. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, this is probably not being vandalized enough to warrant semi-protection. I'm looking at the list of articles requested for protection here, and it seems like these are being vandalized more often than this or there's an ongoing edit war in the article. Neither of these things are happening in this article. —Compdude123 (talk) 18:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Aerospace engineering worldwide
The article section on Aerospace engineering worldwide is little more than a list of academic institutions, with some self-promotional puff worked in. This article is not the place for such spam. There is already a List of aerospace engineering schools: is there anything in this section worth keeping or should it be deleted entirely? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Discussion of capitalization of universe
There is request for comment about capitalization of the word universe at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Capitalization of universe - request for comment. Please participate. 00:26, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- The ME article only says they are closely related or associated. But that is not a reliable source since Wiki pages are user editable. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Notification of request for comment
An RfC has been commenced at MOSCAPS Request for comment - Capitalise universe.