Talk:Space Shuttle Discovery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Related projects: | ||
 |
WikiProject Spaceflight | Importance to Spaceflight: High |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Human spaceflight WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the manned exploration of space. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| This article contains material that originally came from a NASA website or printed source. According to their site usage guidelines, "NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted". For more information, please review NASA's use guidelines. |
Contents |
[edit] Discoveries name
How did the Space Shuttle "Discovery" get its name?
- Third paragraph of the article:
- "The spacecraft takes its name from two ships of exploration named Discovery — HMS Discovery, a ship that accompanied explorer James Cook on his third and final major voyage and Henry Hudson's ship Discovery which he used 1610–1611 to search for a Northwest Passage. The shuttle shares a name with Discovery, the spaceship from the film 2001: A Space Odyssey."
- Evil Monkey∴Hello 21:16, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- Thats one hell of a discussion. -- Cat chi? 22:54, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure this is strictly true - the NASA page here implies that the Shuttle was named after Cook's discovery, but the name was shared by other ships, including Hudson's (and RRS Discovery, which I woke up next to this morning. As you do.) Shimgray 14:24, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- I've made some small changes to reflect this; it seemed odd not to mention one of the vessels which we had a page on... Shimgray 14:34, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Thats one hell of a discussion. -- Cat chi? 22:54, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- Wasn't it named after that ship in 2001 a Space Odyssey? I mean Kubrick made that movie back in the 60s, and this shuttle was first commissioned in the 80s, so it wasn't the other way around or anything. They do that kind of thing all the time, I mean, think about enterprise, it's a chicken and the egg kind of thing, and a lot of people get it backwards -- Kubrick,Stanley 12:39, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Odd
The word 'orbiter' seems to be missing from the first part of this. It is in the edit, but does not show up in the text.
Like here - The is still operational today, and has performed both research and International Space Station (ISS) assembly missions.
[edit] Strange Edit... Third to Fourth?
I'm not sure why someone changed the ordinal reference to this shuttle from "third operational space shuttle" to "fourth operational space shuttle". Nevertheless, for the sake of consistency with other articles (other orbiters), I changed it back.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shuttleoperations/orbiters/discovery-info.html
[edit] Distracting blank spaces
Formatting that encases the framed table of contents in text, in just the way a framed map or image is enclosed within the text, is now available: {{TOCleft}} in the HTML does the job.
Blank space opposite the ToC, besides being unsightly and distracting, suggests that there is a major break in the continuity of the text, which may not be the case. Blanks in page layout are voids and they have meanings to the experienced reader. The space betweeen paragraphs marks a brief pause between separate blocks of thought. A deeper space, in a well-printed text, signifies a more complete shift in thought: note the spaces that separate sub-headings in Wikipedia articles.
A handful of thoughtless and aggressive Wikipedians revert the "TOCleft" format at will. A particularly aggressive de-formatter is User:Ed g2s
The reader may want to compare versions at the Page history. --Wetman 20:24, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I closed the gap at the top, but seem to have created one near the bottom. Easily solveable if one image, possibly the last one, were removed. Do we really need that one?--KrossTalk 01:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] STS-121 delayed
STS-121 has been delayed. The article needs to be updated. Gamerzworld 19:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Not anymore, they are planning to launch it today, at 12:38 p.m. EST. My two cents. Bad idea, with crack in the foam. Casual Karma 10:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
It's only a tiny crack, and the foam has since fallen off. --GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 14:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Odd Tag: Which "person"?
This article presently starts with the tag " This article documents a person who is currently in space. Information may change rapidly as the mission progresses. "
But it is an article about a spacecraft, not a person, and in fact there are several persons on it. A tag which says the article documents a spacecraft currently in space would make sense, but the present tag is annoyingm and it should be removed.Edison 14:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] STS-114 and 121 sections
Unless we intend to add these for all missions, I suggest these are removed. They have their own articles. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. I always thought that these were kind of out of place as well... SchuminWeb (Talk) 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discovery One
Okay- so "The shuttle shares a name with Discovery One, the fictional femur-shaped Jupiter spaceship from the films 2001: A Space Odyssey and 2010: The Year We Make Contact."
is incorrect. The space shuttle which was femur-shaped is not Discovery One, which doesn't appear until later in the film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.199.131 (talk • contribs)
[edit] "Operational" vs. "Grounded for maintenance"
Without a citation, "grounded for maintenance" is no good. To me, "Grounded for maintenance" is something more significant than simply prepping for the next flight. By that logic, all three shuttles are presently "grounded for maintenance". Also, as far as precedent goes, we changed Endeavour to operational again after it completed the Orbiter Major Modification Period back during the summer. However, it has not flown since the refit. "Operational" therefore simply describes it as being on the "active" roster. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I've changed the first sentence to the craft being 1 of 5 operational shuttles built for NASA and 1 of 3 still in use. Some youngsters might not know about the accidents and think only 3 were built. Not a big deal, but that's my change. Remember September 11, 2001 00:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Works for me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Images
There are too many images at the end of the article. It looks pretty messy. Can someone please spread them out throughout the article --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
