Talk:Curiosity

Advertising Mars One in Marspedia's Curiosity article

This is a nice little article but on a Marspedia website it should be about the subject, the Curiosity rover. Applications to Mars settlement are fine because that is what Marspedia is all about, but mention of Mars One over THE MARS SOCIETY is not proper content for an article on a website belonging to THE MARS SOCIETY, especially in the lead paragraph. You have already mentioned applications of findings to settlement, I will delete the mention of Mars One. There is already an article about Mars One.

Thanks for updating the featured article. I appreciate the work you are doing here on Marspedia very much. But the removal of that sentence irritates me. Does THE MARS SOCIETY really consider Mars One as a competitor? If so, they loose credit in my mind. The colonization of Mars is a humanity effort. And, frankly, I do not see THE MARS SOCIETY achieving this alone. So, what is wrong about mentioning other projects here on Marspedia? What is wrong about linking the parts together? A few weeks ago I have contacted Mars One per E-Mail in order to ask them to include Marspedia on their Resources Page, which they promised to consider. Obviously, they still have not included it. Why? Perhaps, they feel that Marspedia is not really alive (with scarcely more than two people working on it, and the lastest news entry on the main page is from Jun. 23, 2008). Perhaps, they feel that some important contemporary developments on the topic are not addressed as they deserve. Personally, I feel it is right to give them every support. -- Rfc 09:54, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry to read that you have been irritated. The important thing for this talk page is to discuss how to make a better article. I do not know if there is some element of competition between THE MARS SOCIETY and Mars One, but that is not the principal quality of the relationship. Mars One has a page on Marspedia thanks to prolific contributor, Rfc. It is with my blessing and, I think, the approval of THE MARS SOCIETY too. I never considered that THE MARS SOCIETY would achieve a colony on Mars without outside assistance. I do not think they intended to go it alone either. It remains to be seen if Mars One will be a help or a hindrance. I expect positive results because it seems their is considerable good will in the Mars One leadership, but more than good will is needed to reach Mars. I have read comments by Robert Zubrin that were supportive of Mars One and comments that found fault with Mars One. There is more to THE MARS SOCIETY than just Dr. Zubrin, but that gives the idea that members are not bound to be wholly for or against Mars One. As I wrote, I favor advertising Mars One. I do not think such advertising belongs in the lead section of an article on the Curiosity Rover. There is room to disagree on the point. There is room to expand the article. Marspedia is not currently updated as much as could be helpful, but that has nothing to do with whether advertisements for space societies belong in the lead section of an article about Curiosity. The best way to combat failings in quality on Marspedia is to write quality articles and improve the ones we have. The time and ability I can devote to the task are insufficient. I thank you for the efforts you have made. - Farred 03:26, 18 December 2012 (UTC)