This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Nearly all the text here was cut and paste from the Controlled Impact Demonstration photograph pages such as this. The text should be in the public domain because it is an original work of NASA. Triddle 03:22, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I know this doesn't have much to do with editing the article, more like a comment; but damn it, those are some cool pictures. The Post Impact 3 one is my desktop wallpaper. It's just neat. -Wunderbear —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wunderbear ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
The format in this version approximately follows the shortened footnote format at WP:Citing sources#Shortened_footnotes. The reports not having author is the reason for using report numbers instead. Using repeated references with a ref name is fine, but I don't see the page number template ({{ rp}}) is even mentioned on that Cite page or WP:Footnotes. So the rp template looks nonstandard to me.. - Fnlayson ( talk) 05:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that the "History" section should either be, or be followed by, a "Design" section. I considered renaming the "History" section to be "Design", but that doesn't seem to fit. The two sections would be discrete, History being why they did it and such, while Design would be how they set up the experiment and why. Design/Test/Findings strikes me as a good sequence, if y'all follow what I'm saying. - Denimadept ( talk) 18:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Nearly all the text here was cut and paste from the Controlled Impact Demonstration photograph pages such as this. The text should be in the public domain because it is an original work of NASA. Triddle 03:22, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I know this doesn't have much to do with editing the article, more like a comment; but damn it, those are some cool pictures. The Post Impact 3 one is my desktop wallpaper. It's just neat. -Wunderbear —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wunderbear ( talk • contribs) 19:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
The format in this version approximately follows the shortened footnote format at WP:Citing sources#Shortened_footnotes. The reports not having author is the reason for using report numbers instead. Using repeated references with a ref name is fine, but I don't see the page number template ({{ rp}}) is even mentioned on that Cite page or WP:Footnotes. So the rp template looks nonstandard to me.. - Fnlayson ( talk) 05:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me that the "History" section should either be, or be followed by, a "Design" section. I considered renaming the "History" section to be "Design", but that doesn't seem to fit. The two sections would be discrete, History being why they did it and such, while Design would be how they set up the experiment and why. Design/Test/Findings strikes me as a good sequence, if y'all follow what I'm saying. - Denimadept ( talk) 18:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)