Talk:Alt.space

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation

This redirect is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Private spaceflight#NewSpace terminology]] The anchor (#NewSpace terminology) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

On the complaint tag that was deleted

The complaint was

too many problems: neologism, original research, weasel words, no evidence of notablilty

"Alt.space" (also written as "alt-space" and "alt space") is a widely used neologism in space-related blogs and online space news sources. For example, Jeffrey F. Bell uses it in a Space Daily story:

NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program has been widely hailed by the alt.space [emphasis mine] community as a breakthrough in US launch policy, but the numbers just don't add up. This project will be too late and too little to make a significant contribution to closing the post-Shuttle ISS supply gap - except perhaps as a slush fund to cover cost overruns in Orion/Ares.

The Space Frontier Foundation uses the term in their press releases

The group, while not endorsing any particular firm or company, has been calling for a revolution in space access, and supports the efforts of Alternative Space firms (Alt.Space [emphasis mine]). The Foundation sees SpaceX as just one example of positive change in the space industry. It contrasts the 18-month, low cost (less than $100 million) development time of the privately financed Falcon, with the multi-year, billion dollar plus government subsidized cost of rocket projects by traditional firms and agencies.

and in their conferences. The Space Fountier Foundation Conference XII was subtitled "Alt.Space". In next year's conference, they again use the phrase. Some of the groups listed (just grabbing a bunch from the top of the page) are Space Access Society, Rocketplane Ltd, Andrews Space & Technology, PoliSpace, XCOR Aerospace, Orbital Recovery, International Association of Space Entrepreneurs, California Space Authority, Armadillo Aerospace, and a lot more.

The Washington Post briefly (in a story about Walter C. Anderson) mentions "alt-space" attributing it to author Greg Klerkx.

He was part of what author Greg Klerkx calls "the alt-space movement," -- those who advocate a bigger role in space for nongovernmental agencies and a lesser role for NASA.

Apparently, this term is used in Mr. Klerkx's 2004 book, Lost in Space. I see no further references from the Washington Post nor mentions from the New York Times. It doesn't appear to be used (except in rare circumstances) outside of space industry and space advocacy. There are enough references (in different media) above to demonstrate notability and justify the listing of some firms and organizations as belonging to the category of "alt.space". -- KarlHallowell 03:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger

Someone proposed a merge of this article (alt.space) into the NewSpace article, sometime in June 2010. At this time, I take no position on the merits of that proposal. I just note here that in three months, I can find no editor that has added any discussion comment on the proposed merge, nor can I find anyplace where the proposer (User:Jatkins) gave his/her rationale for the merge. I have started a discussion of the merge on the Talk:NewSpace page; please leave any comments there.

However, if no discussion is started in the next week or so, I will plan to remove the merge tags. I will also attempt to leave a comment on the proposer's Talk page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 00:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A very limited discussion on this is underway (only two editors commenting in five months). So go to the NewSpace Talk page and weigh in. Or if you are ambitious, complete the merge. N2e (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]