This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
JPL director Charles Elachi reportedly told conference attendees in Rome that the rover may have found organics JPL: Curiosity rover has not found organic compounds on Mars -- Stone ( talk) 22:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
FWIW - Summary of latest news (2pm/et/usa, Mon, Dec 3, 2012) reported here => < ref name="NASA-20121203">Brown, Dwayne; Webster, Guy; Jones, Nancy Neal (December 3, 3012).
"NASA Mars Rover Fully Analyzes First Martian Soil Samples". Retrieved December 3, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |published=
ignored (
help)</ref> AND < ref name="Slate-20121203">Plait, Phil (December 3, 3012).
"Curiosity Finds Cool Chemistry on Mars but No Organics". Retrieved December 3, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |published=
ignored (
help)</ref> - Enjoy! :)
Drbogdan (
talk) 19:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
The article ChemCam: under the hood gives nice inside to the Thales laser used. It is a 700Watt diode pumped Nd:KGW laser. KGW is Kalium-Gadolinium-Wolframate (potassium-gadolinium tungstate). In the French thesis Étude de l’endommagement laser dans les cristaux non linéaires en régime nanoseconde a image is shown of the laser system. Later I might have the time to add a few things.-- Stone ( talk) 09:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Seems the Curiosity rover landing on Mars occurred officially on "August 6, 2012 05:17 UTC"< ref name ="Space-20120806">Wall, Mike (August 6, 2012). "Touchdown! Huge NASA Rover Lands on Mars". Space.com. Retrieved December 14, 2012.</ref> - using "August 6, 2012" in the Wikipedia template for "Sols on Mars" => { {age in sols|2012|08|06}} seems to give "4223 Sols", a number that is *1-SOL LESS* than that given on the official onsite NASA Counter - explanation(s) welcome of course - TIA - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 15:34, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
NOTE: Several relevant comments from a recent (12/19/2012) email correspondence with NASA are below:
- the NASA Mars Clock (at http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/) and the "MARS24" program (at http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/mars24/) are not "official" NASA Mars Clocks, may give similar times and may be "off by some odd amount" (by "1 or 2 seconds" at last look?) from the true official Mars Clock "kernel" - (the "official 'kernel' [is] maintained at JPL").
- the "Curiosity mission clock starts from mean local solar midnight immediately preceding touchdown, and for the midnight at the originally planned landing longitude and not the actual landing longitude. As MSL touched down mid afternoon local time, a clock started at the time of touchdown would lag between the mission clock by about 15 Mars hours." [use SpaceCraft Event Time (SCET) rather than Earth Received Time (ERT) which may be "off by about 14 minutes"].
- in summary, "if you plug the time and date UT 2012-08-05 13:50:00 into an MSL timekeeping calculation, you should obtain that it is mission time 00:00 on Sol 0. If you're off by a second or two, you're doing as well as Mars24. If you're off by about 7-8 seconds, you may be using the landing longitude in the calculation rather than the planned longitude. If you're off by about 14 minutes, then you probably have ERT rather than SCET."
Hope the above is helpful in some way - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Superceded. See below. Marcus Qwertyus ( talk) 03:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Curiosity rover → Curiosity (rover) – This follows the standard naming convention for spacecraft articles (e.g., Huygens (spacecraft) or Galileo (spacecraft)) and is actually a page (originally a redirect) created on 27 May 2009, long before the "Curiosity rover" page was created on 6 August 2012. WolfmanSF ( talk) 06:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was moved. -- BDD ( talk) 21:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
– This follows the standard naming convention for articles for spacecraft named after something else (e.g., Dawn (spacecraft), Deep Impact (spacecraft), Galileo (spacecraft), Genesis (spacecraft), Huygens (spacecraft), Juno (spacecraft), Kepler (spacecraft), Phoenix (spacecraft), Stardust (spacecraft), etc.). In the case of Curiosity, this is actually a page (originally a redirect) created on 27 May 2009, long before the "Curiosity rover" page was created on 6 August 2012. The logic is simple: the appended terms "spacecraft" or "rover" are explanatory and not part of the actual formal names of these vehicles, and thus should properly be enclosed in parentheses. WolfmanSF ( talk) 03:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The last image in the set of images in the Aerial image section includes detailed data on ground temperatures, and shows a line drawn on the aerial photo map that says "Themal Inertia Transition". I looked for Themal Inertia Transition to be described in the article, and there appears to be nothing on it. Did searches of all occurrences of "thermal" and "inertia": nothing. Should we perhaps improve the article by describing this phenomenon called Themal Inertia Transition? Cheers. N2e ( talk) 16:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Done, I guess. Just searched the article for both "thermal" and "inertia" and found no occurence of the term "Themal Inertia Transition"—so it appears to have been fixed by someone in the great emergent process of Wikipedia over the past six weeks. N2e ( talk) 14:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be any section in this article which deals with Curiosity's findings, so I propose the creation of an "Events and discoveries" section. -- Philpill691 ( talk) 18:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by what this means: "including investigation of the role of water;" The role of water in what? The geology of the landscape? Zedshort ( talk) 22:44, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
what's it cost? 99.153.64.179 ( talk) 05:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The last paragraph of this article is a very technical description of how the website for the Curiosity rover is hosted. This information is not relevant to the rover itself and would only be understood by an IT professional or someone with a technical understanding of IT. Unless anyone disagrees here, I shall remove this section shortly. Savlonn ( talk) 18:51, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Headline-1: Rock sample taken by NASA's Mars rover could yield new chemical, mineral finds
QUOTE: "Samples of Martian rock powder taken by NASA’s Curiosity rover this week could reveal new chemical and mineral elements on the red planet, team members say." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 15:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC) -- PS:FYI for future editing.
Is Curiosity the only rover to have a penny or other coin on board? And if so, does that make this the first exploratory lander (as opposed to non-landing space probe) to carry with it an image of a human being (Lincoln)? If so, this should definitely be noted here. 68.146.52.234 ( talk) 14:55, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV - Monday, July 14, 2014 (2:00-3:30pm/et/usa) - panel of leading experts to discuss plans leading to the "discovery of potentially habitable worlds among the stars" [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:42, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
References
NASA-TV (07/31/2014@12 noon/pm/et/usa) - Panel of leading experts to announce instruments for the upcoming Mars 2020 Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 02:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 15 (
help)
Link to Senior Review Panel report. -- ToE 19:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Although a comparison is made to the cost of the Beagle 2 lander, I don't see any budget for Curiosity, or any hint what the monetary cost would have been, preferably broken down in various ways (development, launch, operations, etc). 74.240.193.14 ( talk) 04:36, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Thursday, 09/11/2014@1pm/et/usa) - Panel of experts to discuss the mission status and future science campaign of the Curiosity Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 11:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)\
References
{{
cite web}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 23 (
help)
A while ago I created an image in preparation for the arrival of MAVEN and MOM. However, this is not my area of expertise and it is quite possible that my diagram is inaccurate. Is it? JKDw ( talk) 04:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I watched an excellent hour-long interview with Curiositys chief engineer, as it confirmed and expanded on this article and is free to watch (its creative commons licenced) I added it as an external link, just to have it removed as spam, were they right? Rob Manning interviewed on the TV show Triangulation on the TWiT.tv network Back ache ( talk) 21:13, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
The entire video is an 1 hour 25 min long long, there is an ad and a title sequence but thats over by 1:41 and in total the adverts are only a small percentage of the time and can be skipped through, given this is first-hand information from a prominent member of the project a little skipping I think is a small price to pay, I would even go as far to say that watching the entire thing open whilst you have the artical open would add extra info as well as acting as a great reference source. Whats also really nice is that the interview is technical enough to get the most from the interviewee, my favourite bit is Rob saying they all love The Martian ! (I do too) Back ache ( talk) 14:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Monday, December 8, 2014@12noon/et/usa) - Panel of experts to discuss the latest observations of the Curiosity Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 00:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
References
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:PIA16239 High-Resolution Self-Portrait by Curiosity Rover Arm Camera.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on May 17, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-05-17. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 23:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
It has been suggested that this image should be described as a "selfie", since the Oxford dictionary has recently accepted this term. The dictionary also accepts "pussy" as a synonym for "cat". Would the "selfie" proponents also suggest that cats should be described as pussies in Wikipedia? DOwenWilliams ( talk) 02:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Monday, September 28, 2015@11:30am/et/usa) - NASA will detail a "Major Science Finding" about the planet Mars [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 01:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
References
There's a huge sub-section about the failed Beagle 2 which seems to be making some ridiculous claims/comparisons. What's the point in saying Beagle 2's cost was 4% of Curiosity? And especially the talk about how "innovative" Beagle 2 was?
Beagle 2 (66cm L; 33kg W) is closer to Sojourner (66cm L; 11kg W) in size than even Spirit/Opportunity (160cm L; 185kg W), let alone Curiosity (300cm L; 900kg W).
Who cares if a failed mission of substantially smaller scale cost substantially less money than a large, successful one? Is this useful, enlightening, or meaningful information? Why is a failed ESA mission being defended in this article? — DapperWrapper ( talk) 17:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Curiosity (rover). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, is "whether Mars could ever have supported" correct? I was under the impression that this should be written in present tense, i.e. "whether Mars can ever support". ~ riley ( talk) 20:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:26, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Someone that knows more about this that me should write a "Findings" section to summarize the discoveries of Curiosity. OriumX ( talk) 22:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Since the main purpose of the mission is to collect scientific information, this page badly needs to document the scientific discoveries of the mission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.59.120.232 ( talk) 13:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Was looking for some details on how the rover is holding up -- wear and tear. Adding a section which includes major components of the rover - robotic arms, wheels, antennae, navigation cameras, computer hardware (and software updates), motor / propulsion, frame / body - would be the first step in addressing this.
I might consider taking on this task, (and the other suggestion about adding something on "Findings" or "Scientific Discoveries"), but it would take more research than presently I have time for, especially since I've not been a Wikipedia "contributor", other than cleaning up typos I find here and there. GeeBee60 ( talk) 14:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Response: I am guilty of reading through the entire article too quickly, because SOME of what I seek IS found in the existing article under "Specifications". "Specifications" I find to be an unclear heading, although it may be consistent with similar articles and in that case I will accept it as a standard term. It would be stronger if the sub-headings were clear and distinguished, such as are the subheading of the next section on "Instruments". I appreciate BatteryIncluded's response, but am not sure if he is suggesting that "Timeline ..." eliminates the need for (sub)sections on "Scientific Discoveries" or "Wear & Tear" in this article, or serves as a starting point for creating these new (sub)sections. Thanks GeeBee60 ( talk) 15:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Please add the information provided in below hyperlink about SPARC processors that used in the Curiosity mars rover:
thanks. Editor-1 ( talk) 07:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
There is no any conflict of interest in here, just because my English is weak and this article is sensitive and important, and that paragraph is complex, I thought that it is better to get help from one person instead to make a wrong edit. Thanks. Editor-1 ( talk) 08:32, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
How is the image a "self portrait"? There's no link (cable, metal joint, etc) between the (assumed) camera and Curiosity. And I don't think there's mirrors on Mars. TatuJoey ( talk) 01:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
While adding text is easy, I have not fully mastered adding images from external sources. But this article surely would benefit with an update of images and traverse maps, given that Curiosity recently passed its fifth (earth) year on Mars. Perhaps I will take it on, but if someone else takes it on I will NOT be jealous.
https://mars.nasa.gov/imgs/2017/08/MSL_TraverseMap_Sol1789-full.jpg
GeeBee60 ( talk) 16:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Huntster and Drbogdan for your recent contributions. For now I'll be content, and I do know how to locate further images. My point was (and is) that there is not a lot of photo content past 2014. I don't want to get too deep in the weeds of Timeline vs Rover vs Mission, but there is a lot of early content redundancy in the three pages, while there is little recent content on any of the three. The rover is built, launched and landed and that is history. But five years in, its traverses and current location, panoramic images, discoveries, etc are ongoing and it seems that updating some of that seems to be in order. For example, the Timeline GALLERY has 2 photos from 2015, zero/zed from 2016, and 1 from 2017.
This isn't crisis, but there is an opportunity ( Opportunity?) to update. GeeBee60 ( talk) 18:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:39, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Does it have any lights (visible or IR) eg for the hazcams ? Can it (in principle) drive at night ? Has night driving ever been considered by NASA ? - Rod57 ( talk) 12:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Can somebody please fix or delete the archiving bot? It is set to archive threads as old as 60 days, but there are inactive conversations dating from 2014. Thanks. Rowan Forest ( talk) 23:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
This has been mentioned
before, but there was no response at the time. Perhaps it escaped attention because it was posted as a reply to the discussion of a completely different image...? I've also posted some concerns about (undocumented modifications to) this image on its
Commons talk page, though it turns out I was partly duplicating what had already been said on its
English Wikipedia page (due to not realising that page existed, having followed the "More Details" link and ending up on Commons... but never mind that). I don't suppose anyone will read those, though.
Anyway, for the purposes of this article I suggest reverting to the
original image created by NASA. Why? Because the context in which it appears, in both the source and our article, is Instruments. There's no mention of the radio antennas and the RTG in that section, so they don't need to be labelled (in any language). Furthermore, the current image has deletions as well as additions, including the labels for the different parts of the REMS system.
88.144.175.74 (
talk) 18:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Is there any particular order in which the instruments are organized? Should it be sorted alphabetically? XYZtSpace ( talk) 21:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
MSL and Curiosity are the same NASA mission, and the wikipedia pages have a lot of overlap. Why are there two pages for one mission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.211.164 ( talk) 02:38, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
JPL director Charles Elachi reportedly told conference attendees in Rome that the rover may have found organics JPL: Curiosity rover has not found organic compounds on Mars -- Stone ( talk) 22:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
FWIW - Summary of latest news (2pm/et/usa, Mon, Dec 3, 2012) reported here => < ref name="NASA-20121203">Brown, Dwayne; Webster, Guy; Jones, Nancy Neal (December 3, 3012).
"NASA Mars Rover Fully Analyzes First Martian Soil Samples". Retrieved December 3, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |published=
ignored (
help)</ref> AND < ref name="Slate-20121203">Plait, Phil (December 3, 3012).
"Curiosity Finds Cool Chemistry on Mars but No Organics". Retrieved December 3, 2012. {{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |published=
ignored (
help)</ref> - Enjoy! :)
Drbogdan (
talk) 19:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
The article ChemCam: under the hood gives nice inside to the Thales laser used. It is a 700Watt diode pumped Nd:KGW laser. KGW is Kalium-Gadolinium-Wolframate (potassium-gadolinium tungstate). In the French thesis Étude de l’endommagement laser dans les cristaux non linéaires en régime nanoseconde a image is shown of the laser system. Later I might have the time to add a few things.-- Stone ( talk) 09:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Seems the Curiosity rover landing on Mars occurred officially on "August 6, 2012 05:17 UTC"< ref name ="Space-20120806">Wall, Mike (August 6, 2012). "Touchdown! Huge NASA Rover Lands on Mars". Space.com. Retrieved December 14, 2012.</ref> - using "August 6, 2012" in the Wikipedia template for "Sols on Mars" => { {age in sols|2012|08|06}} seems to give "4223 Sols", a number that is *1-SOL LESS* than that given on the official onsite NASA Counter - explanation(s) welcome of course - TIA - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 15:34, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
NOTE: Several relevant comments from a recent (12/19/2012) email correspondence with NASA are below:
- the NASA Mars Clock (at http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/) and the "MARS24" program (at http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/mars24/) are not "official" NASA Mars Clocks, may give similar times and may be "off by some odd amount" (by "1 or 2 seconds" at last look?) from the true official Mars Clock "kernel" - (the "official 'kernel' [is] maintained at JPL").
- the "Curiosity mission clock starts from mean local solar midnight immediately preceding touchdown, and for the midnight at the originally planned landing longitude and not the actual landing longitude. As MSL touched down mid afternoon local time, a clock started at the time of touchdown would lag between the mission clock by about 15 Mars hours." [use SpaceCraft Event Time (SCET) rather than Earth Received Time (ERT) which may be "off by about 14 minutes"].
- in summary, "if you plug the time and date UT 2012-08-05 13:50:00 into an MSL timekeeping calculation, you should obtain that it is mission time 00:00 on Sol 0. If you're off by a second or two, you're doing as well as Mars24. If you're off by about 7-8 seconds, you may be using the landing longitude in the calculation rather than the planned longitude. If you're off by about 14 minutes, then you probably have ERT rather than SCET."
Hope the above is helpful in some way - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Superceded. See below. Marcus Qwertyus ( talk) 03:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Curiosity rover → Curiosity (rover) – This follows the standard naming convention for spacecraft articles (e.g., Huygens (spacecraft) or Galileo (spacecraft)) and is actually a page (originally a redirect) created on 27 May 2009, long before the "Curiosity rover" page was created on 6 August 2012. WolfmanSF ( talk) 06:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was moved. -- BDD ( talk) 21:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC) ( non-admin closure)
– This follows the standard naming convention for articles for spacecraft named after something else (e.g., Dawn (spacecraft), Deep Impact (spacecraft), Galileo (spacecraft), Genesis (spacecraft), Huygens (spacecraft), Juno (spacecraft), Kepler (spacecraft), Phoenix (spacecraft), Stardust (spacecraft), etc.). In the case of Curiosity, this is actually a page (originally a redirect) created on 27 May 2009, long before the "Curiosity rover" page was created on 6 August 2012. The logic is simple: the appended terms "spacecraft" or "rover" are explanatory and not part of the actual formal names of these vehicles, and thus should properly be enclosed in parentheses. WolfmanSF ( talk) 03:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The last image in the set of images in the Aerial image section includes detailed data on ground temperatures, and shows a line drawn on the aerial photo map that says "Themal Inertia Transition". I looked for Themal Inertia Transition to be described in the article, and there appears to be nothing on it. Did searches of all occurrences of "thermal" and "inertia": nothing. Should we perhaps improve the article by describing this phenomenon called Themal Inertia Transition? Cheers. N2e ( talk) 16:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Done, I guess. Just searched the article for both "thermal" and "inertia" and found no occurence of the term "Themal Inertia Transition"—so it appears to have been fixed by someone in the great emergent process of Wikipedia over the past six weeks. N2e ( talk) 14:18, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be any section in this article which deals with Curiosity's findings, so I propose the creation of an "Events and discoveries" section. -- Philpill691 ( talk) 18:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by what this means: "including investigation of the role of water;" The role of water in what? The geology of the landscape? Zedshort ( talk) 22:44, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
what's it cost? 99.153.64.179 ( talk) 05:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The last paragraph of this article is a very technical description of how the website for the Curiosity rover is hosted. This information is not relevant to the rover itself and would only be understood by an IT professional or someone with a technical understanding of IT. Unless anyone disagrees here, I shall remove this section shortly. Savlonn ( talk) 18:51, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Headline-1: Rock sample taken by NASA's Mars rover could yield new chemical, mineral finds
QUOTE: "Samples of Martian rock powder taken by NASA’s Curiosity rover this week could reveal new chemical and mineral elements on the red planet, team members say." -- Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 15:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC) -- PS:FYI for future editing.
Is Curiosity the only rover to have a penny or other coin on board? And if so, does that make this the first exploratory lander (as opposed to non-landing space probe) to carry with it an image of a human being (Lincoln)? If so, this should definitely be noted here. 68.146.52.234 ( talk) 14:55, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV - Monday, July 14, 2014 (2:00-3:30pm/et/usa) - panel of leading experts to discuss plans leading to the "discovery of potentially habitable worlds among the stars" [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:42, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
References
NASA-TV (07/31/2014@12 noon/pm/et/usa) - Panel of leading experts to announce instruments for the upcoming Mars 2020 Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 02:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 15 (
help)
Link to Senior Review Panel report. -- ToE 19:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Although a comparison is made to the cost of the Beagle 2 lander, I don't see any budget for Curiosity, or any hint what the monetary cost would have been, preferably broken down in various ways (development, launch, operations, etc). 74.240.193.14 ( talk) 04:36, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Thursday, 09/11/2014@1pm/et/usa) - Panel of experts to discuss the mission status and future science campaign of the Curiosity Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 11:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)\
References
{{
cite web}}
: line feed character in |title=
at position 23 (
help)
A while ago I created an image in preparation for the arrival of MAVEN and MOM. However, this is not my area of expertise and it is quite possible that my diagram is inaccurate. Is it? JKDw ( talk) 04:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I watched an excellent hour-long interview with Curiositys chief engineer, as it confirmed and expanded on this article and is free to watch (its creative commons licenced) I added it as an external link, just to have it removed as spam, were they right? Rob Manning interviewed on the TV show Triangulation on the TWiT.tv network Back ache ( talk) 21:13, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
The entire video is an 1 hour 25 min long long, there is an ad and a title sequence but thats over by 1:41 and in total the adverts are only a small percentage of the time and can be skipped through, given this is first-hand information from a prominent member of the project a little skipping I think is a small price to pay, I would even go as far to say that watching the entire thing open whilst you have the artical open would add extra info as well as acting as a great reference source. Whats also really nice is that the interview is technical enough to get the most from the interviewee, my favourite bit is Rob saying they all love The Martian ! (I do too) Back ache ( talk) 14:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Monday, December 8, 2014@12noon/et/usa) - Panel of experts to discuss the latest observations of the Curiosity Rover [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 00:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
References
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:PIA16239 High-Resolution Self-Portrait by Curiosity Rover Arm Camera.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on May 17, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-05-17. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 23:41, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
It has been suggested that this image should be described as a "selfie", since the Oxford dictionary has recently accepted this term. The dictionary also accepts "pussy" as a synonym for "cat". Would the "selfie" proponents also suggest that cats should be described as pussies in Wikipedia? DOwenWilliams ( talk) 02:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
NASA-TV/ustream (Monday, September 28, 2015@11:30am/et/usa) - NASA will detail a "Major Science Finding" about the planet Mars [1] - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 01:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
References
There's a huge sub-section about the failed Beagle 2 which seems to be making some ridiculous claims/comparisons. What's the point in saying Beagle 2's cost was 4% of Curiosity? And especially the talk about how "innovative" Beagle 2 was?
Beagle 2 (66cm L; 33kg W) is closer to Sojourner (66cm L; 11kg W) in size than even Spirit/Opportunity (160cm L; 185kg W), let alone Curiosity (300cm L; 900kg W).
Who cares if a failed mission of substantially smaller scale cost substantially less money than a large, successful one? Is this useful, enlightening, or meaningful information? Why is a failed ESA mission being defended in this article? — DapperWrapper ( talk) 17:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Curiosity (rover). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, is "whether Mars could ever have supported" correct? I was under the impression that this should be written in present tense, i.e. "whether Mars can ever support". ~ riley ( talk) 20:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:26, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Someone that knows more about this that me should write a "Findings" section to summarize the discoveries of Curiosity. OriumX ( talk) 22:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Since the main purpose of the mission is to collect scientific information, this page badly needs to document the scientific discoveries of the mission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.59.120.232 ( talk) 13:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Was looking for some details on how the rover is holding up -- wear and tear. Adding a section which includes major components of the rover - robotic arms, wheels, antennae, navigation cameras, computer hardware (and software updates), motor / propulsion, frame / body - would be the first step in addressing this.
I might consider taking on this task, (and the other suggestion about adding something on "Findings" or "Scientific Discoveries"), but it would take more research than presently I have time for, especially since I've not been a Wikipedia "contributor", other than cleaning up typos I find here and there. GeeBee60 ( talk) 14:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Response: I am guilty of reading through the entire article too quickly, because SOME of what I seek IS found in the existing article under "Specifications". "Specifications" I find to be an unclear heading, although it may be consistent with similar articles and in that case I will accept it as a standard term. It would be stronger if the sub-headings were clear and distinguished, such as are the subheading of the next section on "Instruments". I appreciate BatteryIncluded's response, but am not sure if he is suggesting that "Timeline ..." eliminates the need for (sub)sections on "Scientific Discoveries" or "Wear & Tear" in this article, or serves as a starting point for creating these new (sub)sections. Thanks GeeBee60 ( talk) 15:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Please add the information provided in below hyperlink about SPARC processors that used in the Curiosity mars rover:
thanks. Editor-1 ( talk) 07:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
There is no any conflict of interest in here, just because my English is weak and this article is sensitive and important, and that paragraph is complex, I thought that it is better to get help from one person instead to make a wrong edit. Thanks. Editor-1 ( talk) 08:32, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
How is the image a "self portrait"? There's no link (cable, metal joint, etc) between the (assumed) camera and Curiosity. And I don't think there's mirrors on Mars. TatuJoey ( talk) 01:21, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
While adding text is easy, I have not fully mastered adding images from external sources. But this article surely would benefit with an update of images and traverse maps, given that Curiosity recently passed its fifth (earth) year on Mars. Perhaps I will take it on, but if someone else takes it on I will NOT be jealous.
https://mars.nasa.gov/imgs/2017/08/MSL_TraverseMap_Sol1789-full.jpg
GeeBee60 ( talk) 16:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Huntster and Drbogdan for your recent contributions. For now I'll be content, and I do know how to locate further images. My point was (and is) that there is not a lot of photo content past 2014. I don't want to get too deep in the weeds of Timeline vs Rover vs Mission, but there is a lot of early content redundancy in the three pages, while there is little recent content on any of the three. The rover is built, launched and landed and that is history. But five years in, its traverses and current location, panoramic images, discoveries, etc are ongoing and it seems that updating some of that seems to be in order. For example, the Timeline GALLERY has 2 photos from 2015, zero/zed from 2016, and 1 from 2017.
This isn't crisis, but there is an opportunity ( Opportunity?) to update. GeeBee60 ( talk) 18:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:28, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Curiosity (rover). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:39, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Does it have any lights (visible or IR) eg for the hazcams ? Can it (in principle) drive at night ? Has night driving ever been considered by NASA ? - Rod57 ( talk) 12:19, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Can somebody please fix or delete the archiving bot? It is set to archive threads as old as 60 days, but there are inactive conversations dating from 2014. Thanks. Rowan Forest ( talk) 23:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
This has been mentioned
before, but there was no response at the time. Perhaps it escaped attention because it was posted as a reply to the discussion of a completely different image...? I've also posted some concerns about (undocumented modifications to) this image on its
Commons talk page, though it turns out I was partly duplicating what had already been said on its
English Wikipedia page (due to not realising that page existed, having followed the "More Details" link and ending up on Commons... but never mind that). I don't suppose anyone will read those, though.
Anyway, for the purposes of this article I suggest reverting to the
original image created by NASA. Why? Because the context in which it appears, in both the source and our article, is Instruments. There's no mention of the radio antennas and the RTG in that section, so they don't need to be labelled (in any language). Furthermore, the current image has deletions as well as additions, including the labels for the different parts of the REMS system.
88.144.175.74 (
talk) 18:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Is there any particular order in which the instruments are organized? Should it be sorted alphabetically? XYZtSpace ( talk) 21:35, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
MSL and Curiosity are the same NASA mission, and the wikipedia pages have a lot of overlap. Why are there two pages for one mission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.2.211.164 ( talk) 02:38, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)