Talk:Landsat 1

Landsat 1 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 3, 2017. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Landsat 1 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

File:Landsat1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Landsat1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 12 July 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Landsat 1/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CycloneIsaac (talk · contribs) 20:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing later.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 20:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 9 is dead.
- Y Found an archived version.
Use consistent dates for citations.
- Y Done (found a couple in the infobox too)
Third paragraph needs referencing.
- Y Finally found the citation for this, not sure why I couldn't find it quicker. Kees08 (Talk)
Ref 8 seems like a WP:SPS. Are there any better sources?
- In the spaceflight industry, Astronautix is considered a WP:RS, and falls under this: Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. from WP:SPS. A quick Google search shows several books that cite the website. We used it pretty extensively in our spacecraft design classes too, for what its worth :).

That should be it.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 21:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Let me know if there is anything else you want me to change. Kees08 (Talk) 05:40, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Landsat 1. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161202113747/https://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sge/landsat/lpchron.html to https://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sge/landsat/lpchron.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External link video

I added a video to the external links, unsure of copyright. Archive.org says it is CC0. I am not sure I understand copyright for things on Archive.org, so leaving here in case anyone feels like figuring it out so we can possibly upload it to Commons. Kees08 (Talk) 06:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From the copyright notice: [1], it is public domain.--KasiaNL (talk) 06:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I miscommunicated. On Archives.org, I do not know who tags the video with copyright information. It doesn't look like the uploader works for NASA or the Archives. The NASA Image and Video Library credits: Matthew R. Radcliff, Michael Randazzo, Aries Keck. Goddard lists them as working for AIMM, USRA, and ADNET. That's as far as I got into it and decided I did not want to get into the rabbit hole of if they were contract workers or NASA employees, and therefore what the copyright status was. I hoped the easy answer was that the uploader for Archive.org is an authoritative source on the copyright information, or that the Archives somehow vets the copyright information that is uploaded with the files. I doubt it, but there is a chance! I hope that explains my question more clearly. Kees08 (Talk) 07:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]