Talk:List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured listList of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999 is a former featured list. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page and why it was removed. If it has improved again to featured list standard, you may renominate the article to become a featured list.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 28, 2005Featured list candidatePromoted
November 11, 2008Featured list removal candidateDemoted
Current status: Former featured list

List contents[edit]

This list of spacewalks includes some that took place inside a spacecraft i.e 28 May 1995 Dezhurov and Strekalov and 8 June 2001 Usachev and Voss.

In order to ensure the list is complete I believe the following should be included - in each case the crewmembers were wearing spacesuits with the spacecraft hatch open, but they did not exit the spacecraft.

Gemini 10 20 July 1966 Young & Collins Equipment jettison Duration 0.01

Gemini 11 13 September 1966 Conrad & Gordon Equipment jettison Duration 0.02

Apollo 11 21 July 1969 Armstrong & Aldrin Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 12 20 November 1969 Conrad & Bean Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 14 06 February 1971 Shepard & Mitchell Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 15 02 August 1971 Scott & Irwin Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 16 23 April 1972 Young & Duke Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 17 14 December 1972 Cernan & Schmitt Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.02

Apollo 17 14 December 1972 Cernan & Schmitt Equipment jettison on moon Duration 0.01


Timeline source[edit]

Here is better source (http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/crew/event_timeline.html) for STS-114 then timeline given by http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/crew/event_timeline.html since the nasa.gov since timeline on nasa.gov is not updated correctly.

Link misdirection[edit]

The external link labeled "JSC Oral History Project" actually points to NASA's U. S. Human Spaceflight History page. The correct link to the oral histories is: http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/oral_histories.htm WVhybrid 22:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Total number[edit]

The external link to NASA gives a total of 243 spacewalks while we list 253. However there were some other errors noted on that page. We have 78 spacewalks from Mir while they list only 75 - possibly they subtracted the 3 internal spacewalks twice. (Seven more to identify.) Rmhermen 17:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spacewalks/EVA[edit]

I'm wondering how many europeans, except Thomas Reiter has performed EVAs? Or was Reiter the first one? --84.49.146.87 07:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Voskhod2.jpg[edit]

Image:Voskhod2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured List Criteria[edit]

After reading the FL removal discussion, it seems that the list of improvements needed to bring the article back to featured status isn't very long, but will require a bit of work. I've started that list here. Please feel free to add to it as you deem necessary.

I have addressed one specific complaint in the removal discussion, that the first EVA had no reference. It does now.

  1. Sortable table
  2. In-line references (for every entry??) (Can an article have too many references?)
  3. Better, more up-to-date lead. Perhaps a couple of sections.
  4. More detail and better grammar in comments. (Are complete sentences required?)

WVhybrid (talk) 06:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To return List of ISS spacewalks to FL status, it required that I add inline references for each and every single EVA performed, so I would expect the same would be true for this list. This page has been on my list of things to do, but would be difficult to get sources for some EVAs, especially those performed during the cold war era by Russia (and I just haven't had the time to work on this list). Yes, complete sentences are required, simply saying "Add solar array" or some such, is contrary to the classification of a featured list. "It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing a complete set of items where practical, or otherwise at least all of the major items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about entries." and "It features professional standards of writing." Due to this, it would also be a good idea to format it more like the ISS spacewalk list, with the comments section on the bottom. Again, not a small task, lol. I personally do not see any reason to have a table such as this sortable, and would not consider that a high priority, rather, a simple legend could be used to distinguish Russian EVAs, shuttle EVAs, ISS EVAs (see the above FL for reference). It also greatly needs to be separated into sections, at the very least, by decade. Ariel♥Gold 22:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the reply. I agree the table format used for the ISS spacewalks is more pleasing to the eye. And I've not been very excited about table sorting, but it does seem to be "a la mode" in FLs. As for all the work that is needed, I guess I can say: "Oh, Brother". I might give it a try. It certainly gives me the excuse to go ahead and get a good editor instead of just using my browser.
As for difficulty finding out about the early Russian spacewalks, there probably is enough info available now days to allow at least a sentence or two about each one. As a lark, I went looking for details about the first Salyut-6 spacewalk, and I was able to find some details from an interview with one of the cosmonauts.
Anyway, I propose a collaboration, if you are interested. WVhybrid (talk) 23:58, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be happy to work on it some, if I have the time in the next few weeks, but no promises :) As for sorting, it is not mandatory, nor is it a requirement for a FL. I personally don't see how this list would benefit from having all the columns sortable, it makes little sense to me. The list is a timeline, and if it is made clear (either by a legend, or perhaps by different cell background colors, although I personally dislike those in long tables such as this) which EVAs were done by which agency, from what location, I see no real benefit to having the table sortable. If anyone can give a valid reason for having sorted columns, I may possibly change my mind, but I can't see why it would make the list any better. The main issues (as I see them) are the lack of sections, lack of references, poor writing, and poor lead. Ariel♥Gold 02:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great. I'm okay with copying the table format used on ISS spacewalks, if that's okay with you. I'll get started on the non-ISS and non-MIR references. Yesterday I bought a couple used books on Soviet space history on half.com to help out. WVhybrid (talk) 16:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking about your comment on my talk page WVhybrid. I'm not necessarily worried about the size of the article, as long as it increases "readability". What I am worried about however, is the duplicity between this list and the ISS/Mir spacewalks list. We are duplicating content here, and that looks like a bad idea to me. However, I have little clue on how to solve that issue. Anyone else ? --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, DJ. Regarding length, why don't we take the position that if the article has to be split to make FL, then we split it. If we can get FL status without splitting, then we don't split. Regarding duplication, I don't think splitting out the Mir and ISS spacewalks is possible if we want a chronological order list, because the Space Shuttle-only spacewalks are on a mixed timeline with the Mir and ISS spacewalks. WVhybrid (talk) 23:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication of entries on multiple EVA lists[edit]

Some time ago I looked at the question of entries that need to appear on multiple lists. If the number of lists is small, cut/paste copying the text (and re-copying it if gets updated) is a "simple" solution. Cut/paste does not, however, "scale well." That is, if there were dozens of lists of EVAs, and each list contained some subset of the comprehensive list of all EVAs, keeping all those dozens of lists up-to-date would be quite a chore!

In fact, there should be dozens of lists of EVAs, because there have been dozens of spacewalkers and it would be totally cool to have, for example, a list of all EVAs conducted by Franklin Chang-Diaz on the Franklin Chang-Diaz page, and so on.

The technology which the wikimedia software provides for this is WP:Templates, which can be quite complex to use. In summary, though, templates could be used to generate from a single list of EVAs any number of different EVA tables, where each table shows those EVAs which match the criteria of a given "selector". The prior work that I did pursuing this approach is still available at User:Sdsds/Template. (sdsds - talk) 07:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing the spacewalk list back to FL status is a LOT of work. For instance, only about 25% of the data entries have in-line citations so far. Creating templates for each astronaut would probably require creating a template for each spacewalk. That sounds like even more work.
I would urge the priority should be to bring the list up to FL status, then work on additional items, such as the template plan described by User:Sdsds. Now, if we have to go to templates to meet FL status, that's a different story. WVhybrid (talk) 13:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flag Icons[edit]

I think that for the purposes of this list, the flag icons should be removed, for a couple reasons. First, flag icons are distracting, and they put emphasis on nationality, not on the person or the activity the list is detailing. Second, nationality is not relevant to the missions, or the EVAs. Any astronaut could do the EVAs, not just those of a certain nationality. Additionally, it is really just a table full of US and Russian flags, which is unnecessary in my opinion. If someone wants to know what country the person is, they can simply click on their name. MOS:ICON details what the purpose of these small icons are, and they are most used in national sporting lists, where representation of a country is an important aspect of the list. In this case, the list is about spacewalks, not about what country performed those EVAs. Additionally, keeping in mind WP:Accessibility, the sheer number of icons in this list provides issues for those with visual disabilities. Overall, I think in this list, the use of flags is not helpful to the list, and is very distracting, especially since they are used over and over and over, for the same person repeatedly, and I do not think that it adds anything to the list. I've removed the most recent flags, but then discovered the entire first part of the list has them. I would suggest removing them prior to attempting to get this list to FL status. Ariel♥Gold 04:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must disagree with ArielG's conclusion.
First, the flags are not distracting. They convey useful information, and, I believe, help depict the international flavor of the exploration of space as it has developed the last few years.

Second, as AG may have noticed while deleting some flagicons, not all flags are US or Russian (half the flags deleted by AG were Swedish and had been put there by someone with a Swedish IP address). I reject the idea that the country of origin is unimportant, and that the astronauts' and cosmonauts' country is mere trivia. If that was true, astronauts wouldn't wear their country's flag on their uniform, and the ISS web site wouldn't display the flags of all the participating countries. What better a way to show the growing international presence in orbit than to show the flags of the participating countries. As for the guidelines of using flag icons for international sporting events, I can't think of a greater "sporting" event than spacewalking. I especially like the flags that depicted astronauts from two different countries on a single spacewalk.

Third, this is a really long list, and the flag icons add a little "color" to the list.

Fourth, all of the flag icons meet the accessibility requirement for alt text or captions. Some visually impaired readers may find the flag information useful.

Lastly, I've think I've been quite accommodating, and I believe, polite, to ArielG's comments regarding reference archiving, table formatting and photo locations, even if I disagreed with those conclusions. I was a little disappointed when my request to her to please help rewrite the lead didn't even receive a reply, but I kept quiet about that as well (until now). But now, deleting flag icons without a discussion does, I think, deserve this reply. I've put a lot of work into trying to bring this article back for demotion, and think my opinion should be considered.
WVhybrid (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, thank goodness the international team on the ISS survived the space junk scare today! WV
I deleted only four or so icons, from the last section because when viewing only that section, there were only a couple icons and they seemed out of place. It was only after that, that I noticed the entire table was full of them. I personally find them overwhelming, especially when the same flag is used over and over for the same astronaut when they make repeated EVAs. I personally don't think that nationality should be emphasized in this list, because these are EVAs, nationality has nothing to do with who performs EVAs. That is, however, my personal opinion, which is why I posted the suggestion here. It is not an insult to the work you've done, WV. It seems that you're upset with me that I didn't work on this table, but first of all, you seemed to be doing fine, and I did not think you needed any help, second, I've been seriously ill, and have not edited much at all, so I have not had the time to look over the list. If you disagreed with the reformatting of the table, or other suggestions I had, just say so, and don't do the changes. However, the format of the old list was very hard to read, it being one giant list with no sections, so I'm not sure why you would have disagreed with that. Keep in mind that you asked for my thoughts, my opinions, and I gave them. You don't have to agree with them, or make the changes. When it goes to FLC, others can give their input. Ariel♥Gold 00:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to hear that you have been ill, AreilG. I sincerely hope things go better for you. WVhybrid (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List split[edit]

I split the list, not because of any problem with the aesthetics of the list, but because the length was making it very tough to edit -- the length of time required to save the data frequently caused saving failures, for instance (a WP-internal problem, not a problem with the computer). RandomCritic (talk) 01:45, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grey background[edit]

Some sort of explanation needs to be given as to why some EVAs have a grey background listed. There is nothing to explain this rather visually striking change in some of the EVAs (it would appear that they are ones conducted on the moon, but it should be explained at the top for those unfamiliar with the reasoning). Ariel♥Gold 14:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:06, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 20 external links on List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:24, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:18, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of spacewalks and moonwalks 1965–1999. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest rock discovered[edit]

" Genesis Rock, the oldest rock recovered during the Apollo missions." No - the Genesis Rock article disputes this. 137.188.108.49 (talk) 21:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_spacewalks_and_moonwalks_1965–1999&oldid=1216384963"