Talk:Apollo Lunar Module/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:38, 13 December 2018

Revision as of 02:03, 31 December 2018

Line 243:

Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 22:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

== Confusing word choice ==

I noticed that in the first paragraph the LM is referred to as being "crewed" as opposed to "manned" or "piloted". Many may not realize that this type of homophone can be confusing to the visually impaired or anyone who prefers to hear the article/have it read to them. I realize much of the information in this article comes from a time before such things were considered, but I think it makes sense to use less confusing verbiage. Just imagine hearing (as an example) "This was the first crewed spacecraft to orbit the earth". You can see how this could be ambiguous in certain situations. Any thoughts on using "manned" or something similar? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/23.120.46.76|23.120.46.76]] ([[User talk:23.120.46.76#top|talk]]) 00:08, 30 September 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:"Manned" is already used in the previous sentence, and using it again so soon is usually considered bad style. Also, "piloted" can imply that a previous spacecraft has a crew, but that the craft was unpiloted/automated. Please note that in today's gender-neutral climate, "crewed" is now preferred to "manned", and most instances of the latter are being changed to the former in Wikipedia spacecraft articles, but not by me. Sometimes you can't please everyone no matter what you do. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 00:45, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

::Well I am all for inclusive language, but NOT at the expense of a more ambiguous sentence. Please tell me this is not a controversial opinion! <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2600:1012:B02F:5B13:DC4B:6994:E1E0:A5AF|2600:1012:B02F:5B13:DC4B:6994:E1E0:A5AF]] ([[User talk:2600:1012:B02F:5B13:DC4B:6994:E1E0:A5AF#top|talk]]) 01:09, 30 September 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:::The gender-neutral language proponents would probably have an opposite take, as most activists view their issue as the most important. Anyway, I believe the context of the sentence should make clear which word is being used here. Would someone really write "This was the first '''crude''' spacecraft to orbit the earth", as opposed to a "complex" spacecraft? - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 01:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

::::Perhaps I am not being clear. I understand that in this particular instance you may be right that "crewed" is a better choice in terms of style. My surprise is at the fact that some "activists" would change language even at the expense of clarity. This does not improve the project. In other words, I am a proponent of inclusive language, but never at the expense of improving an article. If the choice is between inclusive and non-inclusive language by all means use inclusive EXCEPT when doing so makes an article clunkier or less clear. This should be a no brainer. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2600:1012:B005:46A1:E52C:F5E5:BB14:6BE9|2600:1012:B005:46A1:E52C:F5E5:BB14:6BE9]] ([[User talk:2600:1012:B005:46A1:E52C:F5E5:BB14:6BE9#top|talk]]) 03:17, 30 September 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:::::Nothing on Wikipedia is a no brainer. No matter what someone thinks is best, there's someone who thinks the opposite, and usually someone caught in the middle. - [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 03:56, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

::::::My sole objection to used "crewed" for Apollo and earlier US spaceflights is that it's applying a gender-neutral word to what was not then a gender-neutral activity. We wouldn't refer to "the people on the University of Texas softball team", even though it is a gender specific team. Once we got to Shuttle flights and mixed gender crews, calling them "crewed" is perfectly sensible. [[User:Almostfm|Almostfm]] ([[User talk:Almostfm|talk]]) 01:59, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

:::::::May I suggest this:

::::::::"The Lunar Module was the first manned spacecraft to operate exclusively in the airless vacuum of space, as well as the first, and to date only, one to land anywhere beyond Earth."

:::::::Tho a bit inelegant, it does solve both problems. (Please, ''please'', don't anybody suggest we substitute "staffed" for "crewed"!) [[User:Trekphiler|<span style="font-family: cursive; color: #1DACD6;">TREKphiler</span>]] [[User talk:Trekphiler|<sup style="font-family: cursive; color: #880085;">any time you're ready, Uhura</sup>]] 05:29, 1 October 2018 (UTC)