Talk:Space architecture

Etymology
The section on etymology seems out-of-place and unnecessary, though some of the points such as the discussion of the distinction between "Space Architecture" as the more general or as the more specific form of architecture seem warranted. Can anyone give a good reason not to get rid of most of this section?129.92.250.45 (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Strange, I came here to say just this. Let's give it another week to see if anyone responds.  Viriditas (talk) 03:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Origins
Completely unsourced. I'm thinking of downgrading this from C to Start-class. Viriditas (talk) 03:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Looks like it still meets the C-Class criteria. Viriditas (talk) 03:32, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Brushes and vacuum
"These dust particles can't be brushed away in a vacuum". Why not? Midgley (talk) 17:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Virgin Galactic Ad?
As Much as I'm excited to see Virgin Galactic's private space tourism project take off, the section on this article seems like an ad. 12.203.226.194 (talk) 12:54, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Source/Notability of images
The structural diagrams in the gallery aren't particular, specific designs or approaches - rather they appear to be hobbyist designs by a single person. Are they at all useful for the discussion? 58.6.253.196 (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Space architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060930025908/http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/people/journals/space/kloeris/05-01-01.html to http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/people/journals/space/kloeris/05-01-01.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091005082516/http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/genesis_II/ to http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/genesis_II/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071002204030/https://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/14day4_orbits456.htm to https://history.nasa.gov/ap08fj/14day4_orbits456.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100903144152/http://www.astronautix.com/fam/martions.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/fam/martions.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090711163533/http://www.fmars2009.org/ to http://www.fmars2009.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:00, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Space architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://pdf.aiaa.org/preview/CDReadyMSPACE06_1393/PV2006_7471.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090416114526/http://www.columbiassacrifice.com/%260_shttlovrvw.htm to http://www.columbiassacrifice.com/%260_shttlovrvw.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090725144742/http://cio.gsfc.nasa.gov/externalflash/international/ to http://cio.gsfc.nasa.gov/externalflash/international/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100116233913/http://astronautix.com/craft/vonn1952.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/craft/vonn1952.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:29, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Dispute
Sorry for using the default (& offputting?) heading from the section's box template but that's about all I can do for now.

From my edit summary:

Removed *blatant* advertising copy (but the section states things as fact that need verifying): "The spaceflight experience offered by Virgin Galactic promises to transform access to space and indeed the very idea of an astronaut."

From the hidden comment of my edit to Space architecture § Virgin Galactic:

This section contains statements phrased as future facts ("SS2 will...") that need rephrasing ("As of [date], SS2 is designed to..." "has been tested to have..." See also Template:As of.) and verification of accuracy. Please consider further condensing this section, especially concerning SS2. If relevant, some Virgin Galactic-centric material directly about space architecture can be added, or the header could be changed. Thank you, Geekdiva (talk) 03:49, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion under Varieties in Suborbital
Add a paragraph in Suborbital section on architecture that defy gravity and completely liberate itself from the ground. This type can float in the air without crossing the boundary of space and reach orbital speed; a work done by researcher Dr. Georges Kachaamy.

Suggested wording :

For Gravity Defiant Architecture Dr. Georges Kachaamy has been conducting ongoing research and exhibitions of airborne architecture known by Rising Oases that are completely detached from the ground and float in the air.

-Josy-(TM) (talk) 12:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Not done That is out of scope for this article: Space architecture is the theory and practice of designing and building inhabited environments in outer space.
 * "Architecture" in this context means the structure of spacecraft, not of buildings, even ones that futuristically float in the air like science fiction. JustinTime55 (talk) 00:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)