Talk:Galileo project

Galileo studied what?

The section on the launch says that

> Galileo would later also study this.

The previous sentence gives no context as to what "this" is referring to. Perhaps sentences got re-ordered in the history and need to be put back in the right order? Or should this sentence be removed entirely?

You are right, this sentence means nothing (or is so obscure that it can't be deciphered), so I removed it. Artem.G (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the facts listed about Io, which ones were discovered by Galileo?

The first paragraph of the the section on Io states several facts about Io. It is unclear which fact about Io were discovered by Galileo and which were known prior. If these facts about Io (e.g. Io's size, the orbital resonance, the frictional forces which create lava flows) were discovered by Galileo, then perhaps it should be stated explicitly.

If not (i.e. if these facts were known prior to the Galileo mission), then maybe they don't have their place in this article? If these facts were known prior to the Galileo mission but are relevant for the rest of the paragraph, it should definitively be made explicit that they were not discovered by Galileo.

"Unmanned"?!

Why does this use the term "unmanned" instead of "robotic"? NASA's style guide has recommended against using "manned"/"unmanned" since 2004. 24.59.58.64 (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

That term is not used anywhere in the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7 It's in the description at the very top.

Galileo project

Unmanned NASA spacecraft which studied the planet Jupiter and its moons 24.59.58.64 (talk) 22:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Y Oh. I didn't know the short description was human visible. Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:31, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7 Thank you! :) 24.59.58.64 (talk) 05:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

GA subpage move proposal

I'd like to do some clean up of the GA subpages associated with this article and with Galileo (spacecraft). I understand that the pages came from a content split, but I think the names are out of sync with the pages they are considered to be reviews of. The subpages are:

• Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)/GA1 - linked on this page in article history, but has the other page name
• Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)/GA2 - linked on Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)
• Talk:Galileo project/GA1 - linked on this page

The first one was before the content split. I think it's up to the editors of this page to decide whether that review is more suitably associated with this page or the other one, but if it's here I think it should have the right name. Assuming it should be here, I propose to do the following moves:

• Talk:Galileo project/GA1 -> Talk:Galileo project/GA2 without leaving a redirect
• Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)/GA1 -> Talk:Galileo project/GA1 without leaving a redirect
• Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)/GA2 -> Talk:Galileo (spacecraft)/GA1 without leaving a redirect

I would then make sure article_history on each talk page reflects the correct links in each case. Any comments before I make the moves? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

During the GA review process, the article was split into two. The pages were later improperly swapped around by cutting and pasting instead of moving, thus trashing the article histories. So sure, go for it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

OK, done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!

Good job everyone. Just the lede made me think "wow it was such a brave little toaster" and I found the whole saga oddly moving as well as fascinating. TY for your work. jengod (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm always glad to hear feedback on articles. Glad you enjoyed it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)