Talk:Expedition 67

Sourcing
In order to show notability, the article should have references which are in-depth about the article subject, and there should be at least 3. In addition, these references need to be from independent, reliable sources. Blogs and twitter are not reliable sources, nor are any social media sites.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:33, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Crew Table Modification?
I want to propose a modification to the crew table on this article and perhaps subsequent Expeditions as well. The core issue I'd like to address is the lack of readability which, in my opinion, is caused by personnel changing position on the table sporadically across the various columns. I'll post the current version of the table below.

You can see for example Thomas Marshburn disappears from the table on 21 April as does Kjell Lindgren. Marshburn will be leaving station on that date but not Lindgren who reappears on a different row for the third part of the mission. On small tables such as some prior expeditions this wasn't a large concern but with a crew table this large it's getting unweildy. This table also omits the Axiom-1 crews, likely due to the chaos already present on the table with the row switching.

To fix this issue and make the table more readable I propose that the horizontal columns should be the names of the astronauts and the entries on the table should be their roles on the station. I have constructed a table like that below. I have elected to cluster astronauts based on their arrival/departure, so all Crew-3 astronauts are listed next to each other. Aesthetic input is welcome.

Scottd521 (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * My only commentary is: traditionally short flights (like the Axiom) aren't part of the Expedition, so they aren't considered. Demo-2 was considered, but they stayed at the ISS for far long than 10 days and the Soyuz short missions fall here. On the rest I quite like your proposal. Erick Soares3 (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Erick Soares3 and @Scottd521 just a thought should we change all other expeditions for consistency . coming to your one erickSoares i want to ask that so do we need soyuz short missions on expedition pages??Chinakpradhan (talk) 03:43, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Erick Soares3, if we move ISS EP-1 to some other page from Expedition 2 then we can remove these soyuz short flights and Axiom 1 mission. Chinakpradhan (talk) 04:00, 7 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Other expeditions can be modified but many of them have so few crew that the old table design doesn't really show it's flaws. The central flaw is really the lack of distinction between "flight engineer 1" and "flight engineer 2," for example, which causes the crew names to move around on the table making it much harder to see who is leaving versus staying across different periods of time. I've also never seen this officially numbered by NASA rather they just seem to use the term "flight engineer" without number  the citation has an example to quote "Once aboard the station, she will become a flight engineer for Expedition 66."  Even if NASA uses the numbering, as the crew totals get large and crew changes occur more frequently the problem can be seen.  On Expedition 64 for example the crew is small and the old style table still effective but changing those table is certainly an option which I do not oppose. Scottd521 (talk) 04:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for help @Scottd521 updated till expedition 63 only not going further that will be overediting. Older design is suitable there. Chinakpradhan (talk) 09:38, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe adding it to "Crewed spaceflights to the ISS" like in here? FarhanSyafiqF (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @FarhanSyafiqF That looks like a good solution. Scottd521 (talk) 13:43, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I really don't like these changes. In particular, the deletion of "Flight Engineer 2" etc. Yes, NASA doesn't always use these in the public lists but they definitely exist internally (and sometimes on the On Orbit Daily Status Report).  These Wikipedia pages were the one public source where they were gathered together. Now whether the flight engineer numbers ARE the correct ones used by NASA or whether a Wikipedian was making them up incorrectly I don't know, that's a different question. But they definitely exist, and are useful to me. Deleting the old ones from previous expeditions is a very bad idea unless you have evidence they are incorrect. JonathanMcDowell (talk) 06:36, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @JonathanMcDowell I see your point. If we have accurate numbers we can add them to either table design (the row headers in the old layout or the body of the table in the new layout), so I think the real issue is obtaining/verifying those numbers.  Scottd521 (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)