Wikipedia:WikiProject Space

Wikimedia subject-area collaboration From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information Project, Active members ...
WikiProject Space

Scope

To present a coherent strategy for organizing non-fiction information relating to Space. Also to direct the development of Portal:Space, from an organizational and stylistic point of view. The project is also responsible for the Space Collaboration of the Week.

Mission Statement

Striving for accessible knowledge regarding anything Space related info

Overall Strategy

A single, coherent plan must be drawn up to encompass the categorization and style with which to present the related information. A single project page, representing a single Portal, must be decided upon to be the master planning home for the overall topic of Space. Sub-Portals will be developed to handle specific topics, and Sub-Portals as needed to make the navigation of all information available an easy and painless task for the least familiar peruser.

Goals

  • Create a standard layout and organize infortmation in Space-related Portals
  • Categorize each page with a Space connection
Add WikiProject tag: {{WPSpace}} -- mark appropriate related subject with "=yes"
  • Develop concise outline of proposed additions to Portal:Space

Members

Add your name to the list here.

  1. Aaaf-wiki (talk)
  2. Ageekgal (Talk) (Contribs) Ageekgal (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
  3. Ajackl (talk)
  4. Alastor Moody (Talk) + (Contribs) + (Userboxes) 07:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  5. ArielGold (talk)
  6. Bender_razz (talk)
  7. BestGuyEver --BestGuyEver (talk) 00:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)I will work on Space Launches and the History of Humans in Space
  8. Bsimmons666 (talk) 15:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC) Whatever needs to be done
  9. Bmader (talk)
  10. bstockuskuykkuykiuykuykuy (talk)
  11. Carbon Rodney(Talk but be nasty) 14:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  12. Coolgyingman (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  13. Chizero (talk) 17:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
  14. Cremepuff222 (talk)
  15. Dan Tromedlov (talk)-In the hope of expanding the known history and facts of Space
  16. DanielWent (talk) Masters degree in Astrophysics and member of the Cassini magnetometer science team.
  17. DJBarney24 (talk)
  18. DNJH (talk) 17 December 2008; Engineer. Commercial satellites
  19. Drew2794 (talk) I have an interest in the new Ares 1-X project.
  20. E_dog95 (talk) 23:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC) - At the moment I'll be working in Category:Exploration of the Moon
  21. EarthCom1000 (talk) Love space.
  22. Ecualegacy (talk) 02:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  23. Eisenmond (talk) - 22 February 2007
  24. Exodio (talk) 00:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  25. Extra999 (talk) + (contribs)
  26. Fact-of-the-matter (talk) Good at research
  27. General Eisenhower (talk) I will expand Wikipedia's knowledge of Space.
  28. Gr8opinionater (talk)
  29. GrampaScience (talk)
  30. greg (talk) 14:38, 8 October 2009 (UTC) Military uses of space
  31. GW_Simulations|GW_Simulations (talk)
  32. Hydrogen Iodide (talk) 07:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  33. Indoles (talk)
  34. James xeno (talk) 05:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)(UTC)
  35. Jet123 (talk) 10:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  36. Jon Holly (Talk)
  37. Jonathansuh (Talk)
  38. JoshuaKuo (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
  39. Kasos_fr (Talk) - interested in satellites
  40. Ken Tholke (talk) My crib provided no flame-retardent material, just an Emergency Abort button
  41. ElectronKid (Talk)
  42. LanceBarber (Talk)18:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC) - US space wings, satellites, manned projects, launch and tech articles
  43. Leobold1 (Talk)
  44. Mattkenn3 (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
  45. Mike Peel (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC) - Mainly astronomy-related articles.
  46. Mlm42 (Talk) 14:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
  47. Mrld (talk 00:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  48. Needamedic (talk
  49. Nick Mks (talk
  50. Ninney - My great ways to contribute would be by making minor edits/corrections to articles (e.g., typos, fixing links, adding references to new secondary sources)
  51. Oyo321 (talk) Try to work on the Space Race
  52. Pax85 (talk) 21:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  53. Petebutt (talk) 16:56, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  54. Pico del Teide (talk) interested in space exploration
  55. Pious7TalkContribs 20:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  56. pocketpencil (talk)
  57. PoizonMyst (talk)
  58. Pookeo9 (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
  59. Purz12 (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
  60. Qmwnebrvtcyxuz (talk) 01:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  61. Ravedave (Adopt a State) 17:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC) - Spacecraft (specifically MRO and adding spacecraft infoboxes) (talk)
  62. Redstarsldr (talk) -go space race
  63. Rdwoodneo (talk) Has some understanding of astrochemistry to bring forward.
  64. Ricardo12458 (talk)
  65. Sai2020 (talk)
  66. Sdsds (talk) 20:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  67. Sean (talk) (contribs) 20:10, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
  68. Sennheiser (talk)
  69. Shojo (talk) - interested in space flights
  70. Simcen (talk) 18 May 2009, Aerospace Engineer
  71. Skeletor 0 (talk) 15:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
  72. Spiral5800 (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC) Johns Hopkins University Student/Researcher, JHU Applied Physics Laboratory (the East Coast equivalent of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory) alumnus, and science enthusiast (if it wasn't already apparent.) 09:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
  73. Staka (talk)
  74. Sushant gupta (talk)- Only portal (space portal) maintainance!
  75. Syntheticalconnections (talk)(my contribs) 00:33, 23 June 2010 (UTC) (I've been working on extrasolar planet articles)
  76. Tatiraju.rishabh (talk)
  77. Tennispro45 (talk) Future cosmologist and deeply intersted in improving the quality of our space articles to satisfy people looking to expand their knowledge.
  78. Terry0051 (talk) ...researching topics in history of astronomy
  79. tham153 retired professor of astronomy and planetarium director, worked on the Apollo Project and did other space related work
  80. Thor Dockweiler (talk) 02:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC); astronomer.
  81. Tommy (Talk/Contribs)
  82. The Bushranger (talk)
  83. Miguel Cervantes (talk)
  84. Torquemada082 (talk) visual representations of what you think you remember.LOTS of visual representations. Are you bored? :x
  85. tpheiska (talk)
  86. Tzeentch42 (talk)
  87. Uttexas (talk)
  88. siafu (talk)
  89. Vsst (talk)
  90. Vuerqex (talk)
  91. VX (talk)
  92. WingedSkiCap(talk)
  93. Wolfkeeper(talk)
  94. Wwheaton (talk)
  95. Zuzzerack (talk)
  96. Gniniv (talk)
  97. crkey (talk)
  98. Skitahoe12 (talk)
  99. « CA » What that?
  100. Yiosie2356 (Talk)
  101. 4-RAZOR 01 (Anything? Talk to me !)


Members of all Space WikiProjects

Templates

Project banner

Add WikiProject tag: {{WPSpace}} -- mark appropriate related subject with "=yes"

Userbox

I made a WikiProject Space userbox for anyone to use. Use the code {{User WikiProject Space}} to create:

This user is a member of one of the
Outer space WikiProjects.

Articles

Categories and subpages

To do

Requests for input

    See our To do list.

    Space WikiProjects

    ProjectActive membersAssessActive
    Astronomy WikiProjects
    Astronomy 188 Yes Yes
    Astronomical objects 31 No Yes
    Constellations (task force) 7 No No
    Cosmology (task force) <30 No No
    Eclipses 11 No Yes
    Solar System WikiProjects
    Solar System 38 Yes Yes
    Jupiter (task force) 3 No Yes
    Mars 11 Yes Yes
    Moon 17 Yes Partial
    Spaceflight WikiProjects
    Spaceflight 91 Yes Yes
    Adopt an astronaut (working group) >5 No Yes
    Aerospace biography (task force) <9 No No
    ESA (task force) 4 Yes No
    Space stations (working group) 2 No No
    Timeline of spaceflight (working group) 8 No Partial
    Data as of 24 October 2020
    This box:

    Space portals

    Here are some Space-related portals:

    (Portals list)

    Article assessment

    WikiProject content quality grading scheme
    ClassCriteriaReader's experienceEditing suggestionsExample
     FA The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates.
    More detailed criteria
    The article meets the featured article criteria:

    A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.

    1. It is:
      1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
      2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
      3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
      4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
      5. stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
      6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
    2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
      1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
      2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
      3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
    3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
    4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.
    		 Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. Cleopatra
    (as of June 2018)
     FL The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates.
    More detailed criteria
    The article meets the featured list criteria:
    1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
    2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
    3. Comprehensiveness.
    4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
    5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
    6. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
    		 Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
    (as of May 2018)
     A The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
    More detailed criteria
    The article meets the A-Class criteria:
    Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history).
    		 Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. Battle of Nam River
    (as of June 2014)
     GA The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations.
    More detailed criteria
    A good article is:
    1. Well-written:
      1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
      2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
    2. Verifiable with no original research:
      1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
      2. reliable sources are 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 no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
      3. it contains no original research; and
      4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
    3. Broad in its coverage:
      1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
      2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
    4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
      1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
      2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
    		 Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. Everybody Wants to Rule the World
    (as of October 2025)
    B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
    More detailed criteria
    1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
    2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
    3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
    4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
    5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
    6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
    		 Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. Psychology
    (as of January 2024)
    C The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.
    More detailed criteria
    The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
    		 Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems. Wing
    (as of June 2018)
    Start An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
    More detailed criteria
    The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
    • A useful picture or graphic
    • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
    • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
    • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
    		 Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon. Yap Day
    (as of March 2026)
    Stub A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. Lineage (anthropology)
    (as of December 2014)
    List Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. List of literary movements

    Tools

    Main tool page: toolserver.org
    • Reflinks - Edits bare references - adds title/dates etc. to bare references
    • Checklinks - Edit and repair external links
    • Dab solver - Quickly resolve ambiguous links.
    • Peer reviewer - Provides hints and suggestion to improving articles.



    Close

    Related Articles

    Wikiwand AI