Talk:Human outpost

A rewrite is/was seriously needed.

 * Most such projects have yet to step out of the realm of science fiction, though they prosper in the fertile imagination of children or fiction writers. Still, they form the grand aspirations of scientists and governments around the world who have already started working toward a few small-scale trials in the foreseeable future.

Such language as "prosper in the fertile imagination" may be suitable to a book blurb, or a children's magazine. It does not belong in an encyclopedia article.


 * In the future, Earth-like planets may be found, as popularly shown in science fiction films of current times, which are habitable for humans and other earthlings and hence human habitats there will not have to be artificially created or controlled and yet human outposts may be able to flourish just like cities here on Earth.

Bad style (run-on sentence); doubtful relevance. Earthlike planets may be found, and friendly aliens may give us a limitless energy source ... and therefore, engineers working on the (reasonable) contrary assumptions should keep in mind that the problems may vanish? Or what?

And so on. —Tamfang (talk) 17:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Why do we not include the bases on Antarctica or even strategic missile submarines
Current content seems arbitrary. Should it be environments designed for permanent occupation (excluding submarines and some polar bases) but short of colonies ? - Rod57 (talk) 10:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)