Talk:Outline of artificial satellites

Satellite retrieval during space walk.

• ... that artificial satellites (example pictured) make up the majority of modern space launches and missions?

• • Reviewed: []

— Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 17:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
• Other problems:

Overall: Not sure what "modern" means here. Might be more interesting to say that due top Starlink, most satellites orbited in 2024 were communications satellites. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:51, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, that wording's imprecise, let me come up with something better.

For the sourcing, that's something I wondered about because most/all of these Outlines are not fully sourced articles per se in their design. All the bullet point items for example are ANL templates like {{anl|Article name}} to output the local page's short description, and the mini-ledes are summaries of the block. Even the featured article Outline of lichens doesn't ref tag all things. I wasn't sure on that. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 15:57, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

That article looks fully sourced to me. I give a pass to the {{anl}} templates, but each section of this article has an introductory paragraph or two if text (which makes up the 17K word size) and only the first one is referenced. I will ask for a second opinion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:15, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

It probably wouldn't be hard to carve out a small legion of sources from each sub-article in each section (each mini-lede in the Outline is basically just a summation of that sub-list contents). I was going to (later) rewrite them all past ANL to specific catered sentences for each domain, so if an article shows up in 2-3 sections, it would have a unique source/sentence for each on that specific context... but that's a, uh, year long project probably to do clean. I can "hot drop" in a lot if needed quick, just not ultra tidy/matching formats and as organized as I prefer. What do you think? No hurry of course!

Has one of these Outlines ever come up on DYK? — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 17:19, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

An Outline article is a kind of list, and lists are permitted at DYK. WP:DYKLEN: Stand-alone lists are allowed, but only the prose part of article counts towards the 1500 character requirement. I checked and found that at least one Outline has run on DYK: Outline of canoeing and kayaking on 20 November 2010. I would not have rated it as eligible, as it falls slightly short of the 1,500 word minimum. I emphasis that the {{anl}} templates are fine; what is required is referencing of the introductory text of each section, which is the only part that counts towards the 1,500 word requirement. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

As I suspected I would, I had to nuke anl completely - was timing out mediawiki calling so many, so I flipped them to plain old wikilinks, kept the short description off each, and started populataing mini-ledes with suitable basic sources from linked child articles. Not pretty and a ton of formats but I can clean that up later. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 19:56, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Another editor said the page would not load for them, but it loads fine for me. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Very Polite Person: Are you still working on this? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:43, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: I went through and sourced a huge number of them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_artificial_satellites#References), did we have to be complete for DYK? — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 15:15, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes. WP:DYKCRIT: The article must be based on reliable sources, which must be cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited to a reliable source no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:26, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Is this sufficient for now...? — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 15:47, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

You've only done the first half of the article. You are still missing references for "Orbital parameters and maneuvers", "Satellite lifecycle", "Launch and deployment", "Station-keeping and control", "Servicing and repair", "End of life and disposal", etc Note also the last phrases in "Applications", "Communications" and "Earth observation and remote sensing". Also: What is "Beichman 1988" (fn 34) and "unoda" is multiply defined (fn 105).

I was afraid you were going to say that... this is what I get for trying to be hyper ambitious for a DYK! Let me keep plugging away, they're all (literally) a click away. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 20:26, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: - still chewing through these, shouldn't be too much longer. — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 20:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

fn 265: "Cite error: The named reference NASA SmallSat platforms 2026 was invoked but never defined (see the help page)." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:28, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

It took almost two weeks, but... done: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Outline_of_artificial_satellites&diff=1363536474&oldid=1360998760 — Very Polite Person (talk/contribs) 21:08, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: Does anything need to be cleared up for this nomination? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 11:58, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Good to go now. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:19, 23 July 2026 (UTC)