Talk:SpaceX will return stranded astronauts in February 2025, NASA announces

Re

@Me Da Wikipedian Nice story it was broadcast on my tv a few days ago. A few recommendations for editing:

• "for for" in the text, should be "for"
• in middle of first paragraph it mentions "boeing starliner", could context be provided please, i don't know what that is
• could the last paragraph merged into first one, so the cause for the event is clearer (the "why" of 5Ws)
• the "The Crew Dragon will carry two astronauts to the ISS instead of the planned 4 to allow room for for Williams and Wilmore" part seems also not sufficiently essential or newsworthy for first paragraph, it can be moved downwards into one of next paragraphs
• "its", not "it's"
• date unspecified in first para, the When - this should be added
• i expect text be like: "two astronauts who went in june5 for 8 day mission will return in february 2025, nasa said. their return vessel, boeing starliner, experienced faults, causing the delay of the astronauts return home." "this is a description of faults" "this is what crew dragon will do in february next year"
• photos of people involved would be nice to have

Hope it helps. Please let me know of any questions? Gryllida (talk) 12:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

First one is fixed. As for the second one, what context do you want. History of its development? I did link to the Wikipedia article though. Last paragraph is now part of the first. Fourth thing has been done. Fifth is fixed. I don't really know what date to add, as the articles dont say what day it was announced. As for the seventh thing, is there a reason that the way it currently is is an issue? For the last one, I don't know of any already uploaded photos, but you are welcome to add some (you also could/should have fixed 1 and 5). @Gryllida Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Me Da Wikipedian ,

1. Thanks
2. A phrase like 'the vessel that was intended to return the astronauts home' would do. I have never seen the name before, it is like inserting two or three words in Greek in the middle of the text. Links to Wikipedia do not satisfy this purpose, text should be not confusing as it is (like if it was read on radio).
3. Ok
4. Ok
5. Ok
6. Would be good to find the date
7. WN:IP (inverted pyramid) see image
8. I can search for photos, but this would make me ineligible to review the new revision

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 21:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida As for number 2, what context actually do you want? 6 I agree I'll try. 7 i disagree. The news here is that SpaceX will bring them home. I'll try to find photos. If not you can always review it and if you pass it then afterwards suggested an edit to add them. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 22:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Me Da Wikipedian We appear to have time and availability here to write full three paragraphs following the structure, firstly in the first paragraph it answer the 5W, then in the second paragraph provide newsworthy details, and then in the third paragraph we write some background such as what happened months ago or will happen months ahead in rare cases like this one. I am not sure why you have not already done so. Nevertheless I understand that my availability permits to edit the story and I hope that @Acagastya will be available to review.

First I checked the linked sources. They indeed to not specify the date. I wrote 'nasa news' and opened a NASA website news page. Within 5 seconds I've found the article https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-decides-to-bring-starliner-spacecraft-back-to-earth-without-crew/ which says the decision was announced on Saturday, with this article being published on August 24th (Saturday). So the date was the August 24th. I assumed that they didn't write about the previous Saturday.

I've made the following changes:

• Special:Diff/4795351 removed a {{pre-review}} template (might put this back later, I just didn't see how this works yet)
• Special:Diff/4795351 added the source which specifies the date
• Special:Diff/4795352 changed order of paragraphs in accordance with inverted pyramid
• Special:Diff/4795354 more of the same + grammar (date goes last in a sentence, after the location part)
• Special:Diff/4795355 provided attribution as we can only report facts, and only oracles can report on events in the future with certainty
• Special:Diff/4795356 added date

I don't know what I will be able to do further, I have another task to do now in my day. Looks like adding photos of the astronauts and the two devices (the starliner and the crew dragon) could be useful and is optional. I'm reasonably happy with my other inquiries now.

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 02:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Changed page name:

• The page "SpaceX will return stranded astronauts in February 2025" was moved to "SpaceX will return stranded astronauts in February 2025, NASA announces".

This is to clarify the key event. Gryllida (talk) 04:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The pre-review template requests a pre-review, which at this point I agree is unnecessary. Thank you very much. Have you merged the information from the duplicate story as well or should I do that?@Gryllida Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 14:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Me Da Wikipedian, Mooreheadmimi says will do it. For my edits I jump in after 12 hours of author's inactivity. Gryllida (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Finished! Mooreheadmimi (talk) 01:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Me Da Wikipedian

I have come with my add-ins! Just to give an update on where they will go for clarity. If I am combining any sentences, mine will show in bold for the talk page.

My first add-in will be at the end of the second paragraph: The Starliner test flight was Boeing’s first crewed space mission – three previous attempts for this crewed mission had failed.

Inserted in the 3rd paragraph, smack in middle: A successful mission is required in order to certify Starliner for NASA’s Commercial Crew Program.

Adding between paragraph's 6 & 7: SpaceX’s Crew Dragoon – certified in 2020 – will undergo some changes before launching on September 24. The preparation to bring Wilmore and Williams home to their families includes additional cargo, adjusting the seats for the Dragon, and Dragon-specific spacesuits for the two astronauts. The preparation also adds in a contingency plan, providing the two a flight home on the Crew-8 spacecraft.

Thank you! Let me know if you have any suggestions! Mooreheadmimi (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Me Da Wikipedian

@Gryllida

I fixed "Dragoon." And forgot to add the minor edit, and summary for that. apologies. :) Mooreheadmimi (talk) 02:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mooreheadmimi did you add these into article? Gryllida (talk) 02:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Mooreheadmimi here are the bits missing in this article currently but present in the other one

• Thrusters are used to keep the capsule on target for each mission. When they fail, the capsule deviates from the flight path, and tragedy occurs.
• The Boeing Starliner capsule began testing without crew in 2019. Due to software trouble, the capsule didn’t finish its initial ISS trip until 2022. In 2023, reportedly weak parachutes and flammable tape caused issues and delayed further testing. On June 5, they launched successfully after three previous attempts for a crewed mission had failed to launch Starliner and its crew into space.
• “We’re not putting our heads in the sand,” Williams told The Associated Press in May. “Sure, Boeing has had its problems. But we are the QA (quality assurance). Our eyes are on the spacecraft.”
• Since 2014, Boeing has used over half of its $4.5 billion NASA contracted budget. Starliner remains uncertified. “The mission was meant to be a final test before NASA could certify Starliner for routine flights,” Reuters reported.
• Boeing's CEO Robert Kelly Ortberg and NASA administrator Bill Nelson spoke on Saturday, Bill Nelson was assured Starliner would fly astronauts again. There was no mention of any timetables for Starliner.

Please also note the article contents is in the past tense, not in the present tense.

Please advise if you would like to add the above information to the article now? Gryllida (talk) 02:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Please also note that fresh sources are listed first, and less fresh (older) sources are listed last. Gryllida (talk) 02:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I decided not to include that information any longer. The article feels quite lengthy and I don't want to add too much more to it that would deter from the tone and scope of @Me Da Wikipedian's portions. I did add the August 28, 2024 source more recently to provide further details on what SpaceX will be doing in the meantime. My article is more focused on the delay of the launch and Boeing's safety issues, while their article focuses more on SpaceX.

I did fix any issues from my add-ins regarding past vs. present tense. And also fixed the order of sources.

Thank you for your work! Mooreheadmimi (talk) 03:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

You do realise that probably only one article of the two will be published? Or are you proposing to publish them as two separate articles? Note it is one event: NASA announced their decision how to return the astronauts. @Mooreheadmimi Gryllida (talk) 03:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I do realize this, thank you! I will be sure to fix how I title articles in the future. Mooreheadmimi (talk) 03:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thank you @Mooreheadmimi for editing to expand and merge The last two points from my list above look a bit more newsworthy than others, it's ok if you don't want them either.

Would you like to take the other article off review queue and request deletion if this is OK with you? Gryllida (talk) 03:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@gryllida Absolutely! The certification of the Boeing Starliner has been on my mind a lot. Thank you so much! Mooreheadmimi (talk) 03:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Tom Morris, @Acagastya, @Heavy Water @Bddpaux (reviewers active recently; apologies if I missed anyone), the article was merged successfully and is now ready for being reviewed. I don't qualify to review as I am one of the authors. Could you please review? Gryllida (talk) 04:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Microchip08 and @William S. Saturn are so inactive the are considered being removed for PEP, but the have been around here recently, maybe they could review? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Reviewing

1st paragraph looks pretty solid. I chuckle at EIGHT SOURCE ARTICLES for what is barely (and I mean barely) a 7-paragraph article. 🤣 I am soldiering on.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bddpaux This is less sources then sometimes, you've reviewed and 8 source 3 paragraph article of mine... Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Review of revision 4795919 [Passed]

Revision 4795919 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 21:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The tone/structure of the next-to-last paragraph borders on problematic, but we'll let it slide through as a gesture of generosity and gratitude.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4795919 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 21:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The tone/structure of the next-to-last paragraph borders on problematic, but we'll let it slide through as a gesture of generosity and gratitude.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC) The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Can't figure out why this isn't appearing on Main page.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

• OK, I got it working.--Bddpaux (talk) 21:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you! Gryllida (talk) 02:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Bddpaux] what is the issue with the tone/strucutre of the penultimate paragraph I'll fix it... Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

A note to the reviewer on sourcing in the second paragraph was somehow un-commented out and made it through the review process. I'm not sure if removing it would be acceptable under the archive conventions. Heavy Water (talk) 06:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)