Talk:Surveyor program

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Surveyor program article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Astronomy: Moon / Solar System Mid‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Moon task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article 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 article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Table

I'm not sure a table is really appropriate here. I'd prefer to put each mission as a subheading, like:

Surveyor 1

Launched May 30, 1966; landed June 2, 1966
Weight at landing: 596 pounds (how about something metric?)

A total 11,237 images were transmitted to Earth.

The successful soft landing (first ever by the U.S. on an extraterrestrial body) was in the Ocean of Storms?. The spacecraft found a layer of about one inch of dust around itself.

Surveyor 2

bla bla

Thoughts? Comments? -- Brion 16:32 Sep 3, 2002 (PDT)

Seems reasonable, especially after I added that image. I just like tables is all, and there was a request for one, so I dove in. :) Bryan Derksen

Heh. :) That request was made before all the text descriptions made their way in, though. I'll change 'it... --Brion

Stable version now

Let's begin the discussion per the protocol. What say you? --Ancheta Wis 05:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The protocol 'does not exist yet. For any action to be taken under a proposal, it first has to achieve consensus support, which judging from the current discussions it certainly has not done. WP:CONSENSUS, WP:PROT, WP:5P all individually (never mind collectively) trump a still-under-discussion-but-largely-rejected proposal. Cynical 20:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures in subarticles

All of the pages for the specific Surveyor missions have the "generic" image in their infoboxes. Since the generic picture isn't the actual probe being discussed, shouldn't we look for a proper image, or just leave that part empty? (DrZarkov 03:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Space Race context

Check out this quote from Chapter 1 of "Destination Moon":

In the wake of early Soviet space achievements the American space program became enveloped in far-reaching political competition with the Soviet Union. In this atmosphere, the United States counted heavily on the Ranger and Surveyor programs, pioneering endeavors in the application of new technology, to achieve an urgently needed "first" in space.

Given that (and numerous other easily findable and verifiable sources), should some mention be made of the Soviet program that paralleled Surveyor? Sdsds 06:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Surveyor Program → Surveyor program – Like the other programs in the category and related categories, this should be lower case. As MOS:CAPS says, we treat as proper only those things that are consistently capitalized in sources, and Surveyor program is very often lowercase in books. See n-grams in sentence context and altogether including titles and headings. Dicklyon (talk) 02:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose considering that "Surveyor program" and "surveyor program" are the same on Wikipedia, the proposed name does not distinguish between these two options, so should lead to an article on the concept of surveyors surveying in a program. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 05:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such criterion in WP:TITLE. Dicklyon (talk) 05:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support, "program" is not a proper noun in this context. --W. D. Graham 14:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - could've been a technical move, honestly, though there's obviously not any harm in a straight-up RM. Red Slash 16:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Same as Apollo program, Ranger program, uncontroversial. benmoore 22:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Bologna

"the world's first controlled landing on the Moon (the Luna 9 probe, which landed several months earlier, had used inflatable airbags to bounce to a stop on the Lunar surface"

Luna 9 was "controlled" by any definition of the term. Luna landed at 6 m/s, compared to 3 m/s for Surveyor. Luna used air bags to soak up remaining momentum, Surveyor used landing pads and shock absorbers. This statement is nothing more than playing with the terminology to claim a "first". It's misleading and should be removed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]