Talk:Human mission to Mars

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Human mission to Mars article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 5 months

Astronomy: Mars / Solar System Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Mars task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Spaceflight High‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Orphaned references in Human mission to Mars

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Human mission to Mars's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Free 2017":

From Lunar Orbital Platform – Gateway: Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate - Architecture Status. (PDF) Jim Free. NASA. 28 March 2017.
From Deep Space Transport: Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate - Architecture Status. (PDF) Jim Free. NASA. March 28, 2017.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 October 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus for any move. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist (talk) 16:54, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Human mission to Mars → Crewed mission to Mars – Previously changed from "manned" to "human" for gender-neutrality, but robotic missions are also human. The word crewed is both gender-neutral and specifies that the spacecraft is piloted. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It really should be Manned mission to Mars, as manned in this tense refers to mankind, and not some compliance for PC do-gooders. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:16, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Revert to Manned mission to Mars. Until the word "manned" is stripped completely from the dictionary, it's the correct word to describe this. I don't think anyone will conflate "manned" with "men-only"._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I count too opposed to the suggested move so far. They want a different move. I oppose the move because there is no evidence cited that any reader is confused by thinking this article refers to robotic missions. Further, the move is just a waste of time that provides no benefit. - Fartherred (talk) 21:04, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Either Human mission to Mars or Crewed mission to Mars is fine with me, but not Manned mission to Mars, per the recent RfC on the matter Kees08 (Talk) 01:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Disagree that robotic missions are human. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We seem to have Human spaceflight -- unless there is an issue with that one too, I don't see why this one would be any more confusing.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per above comments. Although some humans are robots, not all robots are humans (speaking as one who thought a prominent Wikipedian was a bot). Randy Kryn (talk) 15:01, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Revert to Manned mission to Mars - Both the current and the suggested titles are in the minority within published sources which span the history of the subject. -- Netoholic @ 03:06, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Spaceflight Project remarked this time ago and there was a consensus and decision to use the current term: crewed - the recent RfC on the matter. Regarding the 'History' of the subject, there has been no piloted flights to Mars, and the current plans (NASA, ESA, SpaceX) call them 'crewed'. Rowan Forest (talk) 12:26, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I count at least 5 opposes there, many with valid concerns. Why that RfC didn't end in No Consensus is lost on me. "Manned" is still a commonly used term, regardless of what a style manual says on the topic._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, valid concerns on both sides. The historical articles on the early space race have been left untouched, but language has evolved since then, and now NASA, ESA, and SpaceX use 'crewed'. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 21:53, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think current title is clear, crewed feels a bit more awkward. I'm opposed reverting back to manned. While technically in dictionaries this can also refer to women, this is not the picture people form in their minds when they hear the term and to me doesn't meet the precision and neutrality criteria sufficiently well. NASA shifted its language in 2015, and we should follow suit.^[1]

References

^ "Finding new language for space missions that fly without humans". www.planetary.org. Retrieved 2019-10-27.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Copyrighted text claim

Please provide evidences for this claim. I wrote it in my own words. Anyone can look at the sources and attest to it. Until proven otherwise, my edits are to stand. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 201 Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 February 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rr3961 (article contribs).

[1] "Finding new language for space missions that fly without humans". www.planetary.org. Retrieved 2019-10-27.

[1]