Talk:Zhurong (rover)

Does Wikipedia allow high-definition "fair use" image now?
I thought all the fair use images will be resized to smaller versions automatically by the bots. Shujianyang (talk) 16:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Confusion about rover's robotic arm
Why tianwen-1 zhurong rover has no robotic arm? if there is a reason please tell me Chinakpradhan (talk) 06:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zhurong (rover) article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the rover. However, my assumption is that Zhurong is a technology demonstrator, intended to prove China's ability to land on mars and deploy a rover. The cost, weight, and risk associated with extra hardware wasn't justified. Hadron137 (talk) 16:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Why emphasizes the lack of robotic arm? There're no robotic arms on China's lunar rovers either. We usually only discuss about what's there, not what's NOT there unless it's something very important and very common in other objects with the same type. Shujianyang (talk) 07:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Second or third country
Many articles state that China is the second country to land a rover on Mars. However, the Soviet Union landed Mars 3 which included a rover. The landing was successful - even though the mission only lasted a couple of minutes. Why then isn't China the country to successfully soft-land a rover? Hadron137 (talk) 16:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

The Mars 3 rover was never operational. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:B500:115B:19A1:5B94:6D80:634E (talk) 04:45, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Mars-3 might deploy a rover, but it never established communication with the Earth, which makes rover mission a failure. However, Mars-3 was the first spacecraft to achieve soft landing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.242.13.228 (talk) 13:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Different Infobox Image?
Just putting this out here, but recently they released new photos taken from a remote camera of the Zhurong rover. Including a pretty good selfie. I think that image is more suited for the infobox pic than an artists impression, as the recent NASA rovers both have real pictures. I'm pretty sure since my account is new, I lack such permissions to make an upload like that myself and I can't find it on wikimedia already. PikminFan9000 (talk) 14:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Done already. Yet no free image is available. A Fair Use image is used instead. Shujianyang (talk) 07:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Discriminatory
This page says "Chinese" and "China's" way more than any NASA rovers. It is very weird that only this article gets this treatment. It makes the rover seem foreign and from far away. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 22:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I am not asking for removal of all of those words but this is just way too much. TigerScientist  Chat > contribs 22:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Euilas
Why can 46.184.184.232 (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Update as of 2023?
I heard from a couple sources that Zhurong had gone to sleep after a dust storm (the same one that killed InSight) and can't be recontacted right now, but attempts are still being made. Should the page be updated to include the rover's status, or should we wait?

Edit: never mind, it looks like someone added it now! 174.100.203.31 (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should change it from present tense to past tense, given that orbital imagery has shown it to be covered in dust Redacted II (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I just looked at the talk section for the Opportunity rover's Wikipedia page, because it had a similar "uncontactable but we're not going to end the mission yet" phase, and there was a similar comment. The comment said that the rover itself should be referred to in present tense, because it still exists even though it's offline, but all of its activities should be referred to in past tense because they're not happening anymore. That seems to have stuck around on the page despite the comment being relatively old, so people obviously are okay with it. I think, just for consistency between Mars pages, we could do something similar here. DragonGirlStar (talk) 16:49, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Good fact to add
I feel like there should be some mention of the fact that this is the fastest rover. I didn't see any in the page.

Edit to comment: it says in the article linked to note 42 that the top speed is 200 meters per hour (0.12 mph), for comparison it says on the NASA website that the fastest one of their rovers was 0.10 mph. That's how I found out. 174.100.203.31 (talk) 02:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I am not convinced that this is particularly useful information for this article. I do not think a rover's traverse time capabilities, at least not at these trivial levels, is particularly worthy of mention. Perhaps if major advances are made in traverse with automation to allow for much more capable science-gathering and exploration in general, then it may be relevant. But truly, if we are thinking about noting a 0.02mph difference in traverse for an article, it feels a lot more like irrelevant filler that adds no value. Marsbound2024 (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)