Talk:Crew Dragon Demo-2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mission name[edit]

@LoganBlade: I'll be the one to bring it to this talk page, then. You asked in a recent edit summary that editors should "please check the NASA and SpaceX websites before reverting corrections", yet you seem to have not followed your own advice as you once again removed the "SpaceX Demo-2" name from the lead despite primary sources having been added to verify that this is an official name for the mission. I'd ask once again to please leave "SpaceX Demo-2" in the lead as one of the mission names as it is an official name for the mission verified by primary sources. Pinging Rosbif73 for some potential input following a previous discussion on this talk page on a similar topic. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 05:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The names most prominently used on the NASA and SpaceX sites seem to be "SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2" or "SpaceX/DM-2" on the NASA side, and "Demo-2" or "Crew Dragon’s second demonstration (Demo-2) mission" on the SpaceX side. Whether these are the WP:OFFICIALNAMES isn't entirely clear, in that the designations and descriptors used have varied over time. The media are using countless combinations and permutations of the words "NASA", "SpaceX", "Crew", "Dragon"; "demo" or "demonstration", "mission", or the abbreviation "DM"; and the number "2" or the word "second"! Quite which of the many variants should be counted as the WP:COMMONNAME isn't clear either. Accordingly, I think we should continue to list the official names in the introduction, and maybe add the DM2 abbreviation too with an appropriate cite. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The name of the SpaceX livestream is "Crew Demo-2".[1] 146.255.182.190 (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjb9FdVdX5I
If I may join the conversation here, I'm a little surpised by the mention of Launch America. I read in #Timeline that "Astronauts (...) are to reveal a name for their Crew Dragon spaceship on the day of the launch", but failed to find out if the name and/or callsign has been revealed so far. I'm not sure that Launch America would be that name. I guess right now this mention matches the principle of least astonishment, but it looks like it's rather a social media tag. Any opinions about this? Gyrostat (talk) 18:36, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification re. docking times[edit]

10:29 (all times eastern) was the originally scheduled time for the docking (if this is even relevant, it can be included), but as was noted on the NASA live stream, things were running about a 1/4 hour ahead of schedule. After doing some test maneuvers, the spacecraft resumed its docking course with the station and what is termed "soft capture" was confirmed at 10:16, the time being re-confirmed a few minutes later in the stream. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RandomCanadian: That's a problem happening now. As this moment, they were docked "5 hours longer" than the elapsed time. I tried to correct, but was reverted. Erick Soares3 (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also referred to as[edit]

I currently have it as "Crew Dragon Demo-2 (also referred to as SpaceX Demo-2, Crew Demo-2 and Demo-2)"

I think that we need to decide on a definitive name here and set it as that for the article and then mention the other names in the infobox and set up redirects for them.

Talking to you @CRS-20:

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Comment. The editor CRS-20 may not have been notified of this as in this edit as the editor who posted the message did not sign their post. OkayKenji (talk • contributions) 00:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Demo-2 Alternate Patch[edit]

You all are probably aware already of SpaceX's release of another patch for Demo-2: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/gnihxt/dm2_official_spacex_mission_patch/. It's perhaps only used internally. Should it be recognized in this article? --AFLBulawan (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

De facto practice on its name[edit]

As there is no clear consensus on which name to be used for Crew Dragon Demo-# articles on Wikipedia, I propose the following de facto practice to be conducted: Use SpaceX Demo-# on NASA-related articles, Crew Demo-# on SpaceX-related articles, and Crew Dragon Demo-# elsewhere. Any thoughts? --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 17:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Soumya-8974: Or we can simply just call them "Demo-1" and "Demo-2"; it's easier, significantly less controversial, and can be concise/precise enough if used in a sentence well, i.e. "the first orbital flight of a Crew Dragon, Demo-1, launched in March 2019.", or "the Demo-2 mission carried two astronauts to the ISS in May 2020." I should also note that the assertion that "there is no clear consensus" on the article titles is terribly false. The previous move discussion was closed as a "clear consensus to keep the name, having had extensive deliberations and a clear previous outcome". – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 June 2020[edit]

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. Consensus against move. (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 06:48, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– More WP:RECOGNIZABLE, since many people are not aware that the involved spacecraft in the missions are called Crew Dragon. We are WP:HERE to help those people. It is also WP:CONSISTENT with SpaceX Crew-1. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 10:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Sure, your proposed new names are slightly different, but the result of the previous requested move just one month ago was Not moved. Clear consensus to keep the name, having had extensive deliberations and a clear previous outcome. Do you really think anything significant has changed since then? Rosbif73 (talk) 15:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral – These would be suitable names, as "Crew Demo-1" and "Crew Demo-2" are the official names that SpaceX gives these two missions.[1][2] I also agree that these names would be great in the eyes of Wikipedia's policy on consistency in article titles. However, I have doubts as to whether or not "Crew Demo-x" is more commonly recognisable than simply "Demo-x", which has been the stock standard way to refer to these missions by countless third party sources. Also, these names would also lead to even more confusion with SpaceX Crew-1 and SpaceX Crew-2, names which already inspire enough confusion as it is. Ironically, this would be less helpful to readers. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 00:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It is not Crew Demo-2, it is Crew Dragon Demo-2 or Demo-2 of Crew Dragon. Mikus (talk) 05:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Agree with Rosbif73. CRS-20 (talk) 01:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Unfortunately, there is no "official" mission name to use here so we should stick with the standard practice of titling based on what they subject is called in reliable sources. "Crew Dragon Demo-2" is the closest thing we have to a consistent mission name. While SpaceX does tend to refer to the mission as "Crew Demo-2", this mission is part of NASA' broader commercial crew program. Including the spacecraft name as has already been done here, is sufficient to prevent confusion. It also lines up well with other articles on crew missions (it's STS-1 not Rockwell STS-1). If there are concerns about this article being found, varients, such as those proposed above, can be added as redirects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeYourReadThis (talk • contribs) 16:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


T+?? days: ISS boost burn (minor)[edit]

Under the Timeline, it says "T+?? days: ISS boost burn (minor)". Does anyone have any more information on where this came from? I can't find any articles discussing it, and there's no citation. It implies that the Crew Dragon will be used to boost the orbit of ISS, but I don't believe that is possible or planned. Jesse Schulman (talk) 17:15, 20 July 2020 (UTC){{{[reply]

Yeah it shouldn't be possible since the primary thrusters of Crew Dragon are forward facing arranged around the docking port. Might be worth checking to see if a Soyuz or Progress did a boost burn then, since it should be impossible for Crew Dragon to do it. [[User:Xboxtravis7992|Xboxtravis799}} (talk) 2:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC){{{

Removal of non relevant paragraph[edit]

Should the second paragraph on this page be removed, starting: "NASA has agreed to allow its astronauts to fly on reused"..., as does not appear to hold any relevant information on the Demo-2 mission and just explains future reuse and Crew-1 and Crew-2 missions which holds no basis on the Demo-2 mission and should probably be removed from this page and added to SpaceX Dragon 2 if not already present. Terasail[Talk] 10:37, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Terasail: We could reword it to say that the capsule that was used for this Crew Dragon Demo-2 mission will be used on SpaceX's Crew-2. By adding that it may become more relevant. ref OkayKenji (talk • contribs) 03:50, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've reworded the second paragraph. Does it seem relevant? OkayKenji (talk • contribs) 03:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@OkayKenji: It has definitely improved it, however the paragraph still contained details on crew-1 and other information. I have trimmed it so that it now is only a brief overview of the planned reuse, since most of the information can be found on the relevant mission and capsule pages. Terasail[Talk] 17:57, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crew_Dragon_Demo-2&oldid=1206824477"