Commons talk:Category scheme space exploration

Cut from cat page

This was repeated twice, and seems unwarranted: The categories are strange and not consistent. I found double entries and missing ones. This scheme is taken from the German wikipedia where it worked well for all space craft and missions

... so I cut it into here where it belongs. // 24.61.229.179 18:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed internal realignments

The following was temporarily removed in the Commons Delinker, so we can realign it here first. I hope you agree that these changes to correct the structure are sensible:

Rename Category:People in space travel to Category:People associated with space exploration (44 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.

Above: Fix to align with the two parent categories, "People by association" and "Space exploration".

Rename Category:Crew portraits in space travel to Category:Crew portraits in space exploration (43 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.

Above: Fix to align with the parent category "Space exploration" (after above change the cat to "People associated with space exploration).

Rename Category:Non government agency spaceflight to Category:Non-government agency space exploration (0 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.

Above: Align to parent cat "Space exploration".

Rename Category:Functionaries in space travel to Category:Officials in space exploration (21 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.

Above: Fix to align with the two parent categories, "Officials" and "Space exploration" (after above change the cat to "People associated with space exploration).

Ingolfson (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion all requested moves are okay. I merged the two top-categories Space exploration and Space travel a time ago as they were overlapping and redundand. So it's only consequent to rename those categories now. --myself488 (talk) 16:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a lot of changes since (less about renaming, but adding a lot of categories and moving them around) so the scheme here needs more work to be brought up to date. However, I will work a littlemore on the cats in the coming days and weeks and then we can update this, unless somebody wants to start now. Ingolfson (talk) 05:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, the category scheme being ouf of date isn't something urgend (or unusual). Just for intrest: You write on your user page that you are an aircraft pilot. What kind of planes are you flying? --myself488 (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gliders, but that has been a long time now since my last solo. Should really go back, but hard to do so, atm. Ingolfson (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, me too. But I haven't had my solo flight yet, hope to do it early this summer. --myself488 (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Individuals who underwent training for space travel

At Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/02/Category:Cosmonauts I suggested there were weaknesses in the exisiting categories for individuals who underwent training for space travel.

I suggested the existing categories Category:Cosmonauts, Category:Astronauts and Category:Taikonauts should be given longer more descriptive names, like Category:Individuals who went through US Astronaut training, Category:Individuals who went through Chinese Taikonaut training, and Category:Individuals who went through Cosmonaut training.

Some of the existing categories, like Astronauts from Canada, Astronauts from France, seem to contain individuals from those countries who underwent US Astronaut training.

A complication is that, if I am not mistaken, on Space Shuttle missions, NASA distinguished between career astronauts, who went through and maintained broad qualifications, and "Mission specialists", who underwent enough space training to safely perform their experiments.

I noted that, we are likely to see more people who traveled to space as space tourists. They aren't astronauts.

I suggest Category:Canadians who went through US Astronaut training should supercede Astronauts from Canada, and so on.

Category:Cosmonauts contains Category:Astronauts from Kazakhstan, Category:Astronauts from Russia, Category:Astronauts from the Soviet Union, Category:Astronauts from Ukraine. If they are cosmonauts why would we call them astronauts? Geo Swan (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 2010 User:Foroa redirected Category:Taikonauts to Category:Astronauts from China. I don't think this is a very good idea. The early space race was very highly political. So, picking one of the names for space travelers fails the neutrality requirement.

What should the parent group be? Category:Space travelers should not be the parent category for Astronauts, Cosmonauts, Taikonauts, because NASA, and probably those other agencies, classes an individual as an Astronaut once they have completed their training, without regard to whether they get to go to space.

So, Category:Individuals who trained for Space travel, or similar, would be a better choice, as the parent category for:

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Geo Swan for raising the profile of this discussion and adding further valuable ideas.

This is an ongoing discussion at Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/02/Category:Cosmonauts. Please contribute comments there so we can avoid fracturing the discussion among multiple forums. Thanks! Josh (talk) 03:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackcat, Foroa, Geo Swan, and Joshbaumgartner: I have read through the CFD carefully, and I understand why the distinction between "astronaut" and other regional terms is pointless. But I'm wondering whether Category:Private space travellers should be subsumed under the term "astronauts". Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 06:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413: for me it's pointless the category Private space travellers at all, because one is not relevant just merely being a passenger of a space ship. Anyway no, they're not astronauts. -- Blackcat 06:41, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So Category:Astronauts and Category:Private space travellers should be categorized under the umbrella term Category:Space travellers. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 06:48, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackcat, @Sbb1413: Private space travellers are Passengers on Spacecraft. We have Category:Aircraft passengers, Category:Watercraft passengers, etc. already established as a scheme to handle this. There is no value in distinguishing between 'private' and 'non-private' passengers. I do think there is value in distinguishing between passengers and crew (astronauts). Additionally, as people categories (e.g. Category:Joe Biden or Category:Isaac Newton) are not categorized under Category:Passengers just because they once travelled on a ship or plane or whatever. The same should be true for space. Thus we should:

Rename Category:Private space travellers to Category:Spacecraft passengers , matching other types of vehicles in Category:Passengers in accordance with the Universality Principle
Categorize both Category:Astronauts and Category:Spacecraft passengers under Category:People associated with space exploration. There is no need for an intermediate category just to hold these two categories of space-farers.
Remove people categories (e.g. Category:Jeff Bezos and Category:Richard Branson) from Category:Spacecraft passengers. Place any images of them actually as a passenger directly in the category.

Josh (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshbaumgartner This might make sense, but since spaceflight is less common compared to other modes of transport, I still believe in categorizing individuals under Category:Private space travellers (or Category:Spacecraft passengers as you propose). Once spaceflights become nearly as common as atmospheric flights or sea voyages, we can recategorize them under specialized categories. Also, if you look at any Category:Commercial Crew Program mission, the spacecraft passengers are generally considered crew members of the mission. Even the passengers of Category:Inspiration4 are considered crew members. So for now, Category:Private space travellers should be considered astronauts, as per the dictionary definition. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 02:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413 This is the path to having 8 billion categories for every celebrity. Use a gallery or list for that kind of thing. Josh (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons talk:Category scheme space exploration

Cut from cat page

Proposed internal realignments

Individuals who underwent training for space travel

Navigation menu

Search