Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ilenart626 (talk | contribs) at 13:14, 21 July 2022. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I see that three Editors involved in this discussion have all confirmed that the discussion should be closed on the basis that a consensus was reached to resolve the issues raised by including this reference to a neutral source where Gagarin's primacy is explained.

When quoting a WP policy you really need to stop cherry picking the wording. I note that [ WP:NOENG also states “However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they're available and of equal quality and relevance.” As we already have this English reference I see no need for a non-English. As JustinTime has already noted, it is WP:Citation overkill.

I see that JustinTime55 has reverted your addition on Space race on the basis of WP:Citation overkill and I have reverted your additions to Timeline of space exploration and Timeline of the Space Race as their is no consensus for this addition. Do you really believe that adding this non-English citation which 99% of English Wiki reader cannot read helps in any way?

Reverted as no consensus to add this non-English reference, refer Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#First human spaceflight for discussion

Rather than request for comment, would suggest a WP:CLOSE of this discussion would be more appropriate. As per WP:WHENCLOSE I believe this discussion has reached the level where "When further contributions are unlikely to be helpful: ...when further responses are likely to result in little more than wasting everyone's time by repeating the same widely held view, then it should be closed sooner rather than later.".

I believe a simple summary of this discussion is 193.233.171.17 is advocating changes that the majority of Editors consider are WP:MINORASPECTS, WP:FRINGE and lately WP:Original research and none of the changes should be included. Thoughts?

Pinging all involved Editors TompaDompa PaulT2022 North8000 Randy Kryn ke4roh

TompaDompa, I believe your last couple of posts sums up the current situation with 193.233.171.17

"Rough" is certainly one way to describe the consensus with adding the FAQ. You support, I oppose but happy to see other Editors opinions, @TompaDompa: does not mind it being removed and @PaulT2022: stated "If an FAQ is made, it probably should be maintained under Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Spaceflight/Timeline of spaceflight working group rather than one of the pages." In other words, their is no consensus to add the FAQ to Talk:Space Age, Talk:Timeline of space exploration or Talk:Timeline of the Space Race

IMO this isn't a scientific question, it is a question on the mere definition of a mere word in the English language "spaceflight" and other synonyms. In most areas it goes by the common meaning of the term and IMO what Yuri did is included within that. But the article can and should cover "who was first" under other prominent definitions. North8000

Gargarin made the first human spaceflight, the full trip. If he felt safer or had a reason to parachute down (I haven't read the full discussion) he carried the most important object which defined his mission as a human spaceflight: himself. Mentioning it on pages is an interesting fact, but it should be worded so it does not diminish, in any way, Gargarin's pioneering accomplishment and actually promotes it (although Albert II would have something to clear his throat about). Randy Kryn

Hi,folks - just stepping in the middle here, following an invitation from 193.233.171.17 yesterday. I'm surprised to see so many bits spilled over this bit of esoterica. If the USSR had been vying for a cash prize and they didn't meet the conditions as verified by some outside observer, then they wouldn't have gotten it. Absent the cash prize and observer at the landing, and considering the FAI has since recognized Gagarin's flight as the first human spaceflight (because he did, after all, go to space and come back alive), Gagarin was the first. Any reader is free to research these matters more thoroughly and come to a different personal conclusion, but the conclusion throughout the corpus of literature on space exploration is unamibguous: the USSR was leading the space race. -- ke4roh

Wouldn't this logic imply that Apollo 11 article needs to be amended to state that "although FAI later recognised the Apoolo 11 flight records, Apollo 11 mission isn't deemed a true spaceflight according to FAI requirements, as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin exited the spacecraft, failing to complete flight to the Moon by FAI regulations" as well? Sarcasm aside, my position is still the same: as FAI never recognised who was the first person to complete a spaceflight (or fly to the Moon for that matter), a WP:RS should be provided that would establish how FAI rules relevant to such determination, outside of their intended scope for establishing FAI-recognised records. (Where the 'leaving the ship' rule is consistently ignored by FAI both for Vostok 1 and Apollo 1.) I believe no sources (apart from a lengthy synth from FAI rule book) surfaced since this was discussed last time. PaulT2022

MOS:INTRO

WP:MOSLEAD

Sources cited

• Baker, David; Zak, Anatoly (9 September 2013). Race for Space 1: Dawn of the Space Age. RHK. Retrieved 21 July 2022.

• Siddiqi, Asif (2000). Challenge to Apollo : the Soviet Union and the space race, 1945-1974 (PDF). Washington, D.C: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA History Div. Retrieved 21 July 2022.

• Chertok, Boris (2005). Rockets and People Volumes 1-4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Retrieved 21 July 2022.

1. Siddiqi 2000, p. 40,63,83-84. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFSiddiqi2000 (help)
2. Siddiqi, Asif (2000). Challenge to Apollo : the Soviet Union and the space race, 1945-1974 (PDF). Washington, D.C: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA History Div. pp. 83–84. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
3. Chertok, Boris (31 January 2005). Rockets and People (Volume 1 ed.). National Aeronautics and Space Administration. p. 164. Retrieved 3 July 2022.
4. Zaloga, Steven J; James Grandsen (1984). Soviet Tanks and Combat Vehicles of World War Two. London: Arms and Armour Press. pp. 150–153. ISBN 0-85368-606-8.
5. Siddiqi 2000, p. 3. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFSiddiqi2000 (help)
6. Baker & Zak 2013, p. 2.
7. Chertok 2005, p. 174 Vol 1. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFChertok2005 (help)