These need to be organized somehow, but it's hard to know how. how about something like:
- General
- Astronauts
- Manned missions
- Unmanned missions
Mlm42 12:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I entirely agree. I tried various schemes, but I couldn't get anything I was happy with, partly because there were so many overlaps. Hence I have fallen back on vague divisions that I can't precisely describe with subheadings. If anyone has any great ideas then please feel entirely free to implement them! Matt 17:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC).
Are all those "List of"s necessary, or would it look less cluttered without them?
E.g. [[List of human spaceflight programs|Human spaceflight programs]]{{·}} .
—wwoods 22:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Good point; have reformatted template along these lines. Thanks for suggestion, David Kernow (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think the top level needs to be just 'space' lists and timelines, some of the things like geosats aren't really exploration, and neither is space tourism.WolfKeeper 11:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Did you intend to include astronomy-related articles as well? That would make it a much larger template! (sdsds - talk) 14:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Agencies, companies, facilities
What's going on with this section? It lists the Indian/European/Japanese/Iranian space agencies, which are all neither lists nor timelines obviously.
If it's supposed to list major space agencies for some reason, the European and Indian space agencies links link to specific plans while the Japanese/Iranian link to the agency's page.
If for some reason you with to list the major space agencies, I suggest they all link to the agency itself and that it'll list the major agencies, that is the European one, NASA, Russian/Soviet, JAXA, Indian and Chinese. KimiNewt (talk) 21:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm removing those for now, I really don't see them fitting here. KimiNewt (talk) 21:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Someone did it just as I was going to, thanks. KimiNewt (talk) 21:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
