Talk:Artemis I

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Artemis I 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: 30 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Artemis I was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 16, 2022	Good article nominee	Not listed

A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on November 16, 2022.

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.

Rocketry High‑importance

	Rocketry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry 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.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy: Moon / 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 Moon task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as High-importance).

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

August 28 to September 3, 2022

On 4 September 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Artemis 1 to Artemis I. The result of the discussion was moved.

Why no mention of post recovery analysis of data and capsule condition

Why no mention of post recovery analysis of data and capsule condition ? In particular, There were early reports of heat shield spalling, and much later, images of many large areas of heat shield loss. These have been widely reported. A top Artemis 1 mission objective was to test the new heat shield design. - Rod57 (talk) 10:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Artemis II article at least mentions these things. Gjxj (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

Hi, both the main article Artemis program and Artemis II use the dmy format. I would like to suggest this article to follow suit, in order to have consistency. Merry Christmas,--Marginataen (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's been a while. If another week passes without objection, I'll make the move. Marginataen (talk) 09:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, why would any of these American science program articles be using dd/mm/yy dating? Thanks for bringing this up. I will correct the templates and dates on the other Artemis articles to make them consistently mm/dd/yy. (See Template:Use_dmy_dates#Wrongly_tagged? for rationale if needed.) --Iritscen (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iritscen. I don't think it's ok to just change the format when there is an ongoing discussion about the date format used on Artemis articles. Marginataen (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you invited discussion, but no one took you up on it. This isn't really a matter for discussion anyway because the rules are clear: when an article has strong national ties, the variety of English and the date format should match that nationality. Have you read MOS:DATETIES? --Iritscen (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most modern NASA mission pages use the DMY date format including the shuttle missions and Crew Dragon flights. WP:DATERET would supersede these WP:DATETIES concerns, however it would be nice to standardize on one format. RickyCourtney (talk) 07:32, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's helpful to paste in this portion from WP:DATETIES (bold mine):

In articles without strong ties to a particular English-speaking country, the choice of date format ...
is controlled by WP:DATERET;

is unrelated to the topic's ties to particular countries; and

is independent of, and unrelated to, the national variety of English used in the article.

MOS:DATERET then states:

Retaining existing format
If an article has evolved using predominantly one date format, this format should be used throughout the article, unless there are reasons for changing it based on the topic's strong ties to a particular English-speaking country.

Beside that, I understand your desire for consistency. I glanced around at pages for various space missions, and most of the ones I randomly selected, from old to new, used mdy dates and were marked with the mdy template. I did see articles using dmy dates. Some of these articles are marked with the dmy template plus the American English template, like the Artemis pages were before my recent edits, which doesn't make sense to me unless there is an official understanding that space programs are to use dmy across the board. However the main Artemis program and Space Shuttle program articles are mdy. Based on my cursory inspection, it feels like the majority of space articles pertaining to American programs are marked this way. So the easier path, and the one in line with MOS, would be to change the dmy articles to mdy. --Iritscen (talk) 14:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you bring up valid points, however this doesn't feel like the proper venue. I would suggest taking this discussion to WT:SPACEFLIGHT to get input from editors involved in the broader WikiProject Spaceflight. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 00:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]