This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Astronomy: Moon / Solar System This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles This redirect is supported by Moon task force. This redirect is supported by Solar System task force. Spaceflight This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles

The contents of the List of proposed missions to the Moon page were merged into List of missions to the Moon on 04 February 2016 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.

The page is and will remain weak until there is some baseline criteria established for things that should actually be included in here. I would propose that if a dedicated wikipedia page for the mission with --Infobox spaceflight-- template has not been created with at least 2 independent verified external sources in the references section, it should not be here. "Proposed" is very vague, i can "propose a mission to moon" to my wife over the dinner or post something on reddit, it does not make it an actual planned and funded effort that deserves to be cataloged as encyclopedic knowledge. The references cited on this page could and should be mostly moved to respective spacecraft/mission pages, to eliminate useless duplication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savuporo (talk • contribs) 22:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In order to go beyond stub status, I think that this page should give a small (one paragraph) summary of each of the proposed missions. Does anyone want to take a stab at this? Lunokhod 22:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, we should include a paragraph or two about the mission details from the websites of the Space Agencies of the Countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.99.99.53 (talk) 17:25, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it has been suggested here that this article be renamed, Future lunar missions -> List of future lunar missions. Would this be preferable to Future lunar missions -> List of planned lunar missions? Mlm42 08:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i see there is an article Exploration_of_the_Moon on the subject but i propose this article should be renamed from Future lunar missions -> Lunar missions, with expanding the article to get all lunar missions starting from Luna_2 and Project_Apollo, so it becomes a comrehensive list.Msolution (talk) 17:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On this page it says before 2020, but in the Aurora Programme page it says 2024, which is it to be...? sbandrews (t) 20:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Which is to be never. All this section about European or Russian human missions to the Moon is wishful thinking and plain lies. 193.56.37.1 07:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Moon missions by ESA and FKA are going to be mainly robotic, but a joint effort was put forward by US presidency in 2004 which would feature NASA/ESA/FKA network of mechanized lunar exploration followed by a joint colony. I doubt any space agency will ever step into space alone again. On a side note, FKA and ESA have built a huge training complex for the manned Mars mission which has been scrapped by NASA due to a lack of funding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.221.124 (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

does the google lunar x prize deserve s mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.86.74.135 (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't we land on the moon in the 1960's? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.197.7 (talk) 00:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No country is providing their space agency with 4% of the budget like the United States did during the space race. Balderdash707 (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Moon landing was basically a crash and a dustoff. This time we want to stay a bit longer and build up a colony which can replace the costly ISS program in many respects. I've also heard that we are looking for resources on the Moon, and although this may just be a motivational rumour set forth by a few scientists there ARE some resources up there. Nothing like oil of course, but mainly industrial aids and a whole lot of projected fusion fuel. The Moon Treaty suggests that the resources on the moon could only be acessed in a joint venture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.221.124 (talk) 23:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted this section as it appeared to be vandalism (and not especially amusing). It listed only Pakistan and had no text to back it up so I'm guessing it was just someone who wanted to slight Pakistan rather than a serious statement. Silverwood (talk) 11:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree. The word "never" is an absolute that should not be used in this case anyways. A better title of the section would be "Spacefaring nations currently not planning a lunar mission." Even so, Pakistan should not even have been mentioned so it is probably someone failing to vandalize properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.221.124 (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Indian Manned Mission which was originally planned for 2020 is now fast tracked to 2015. ISRO's Chairman Madhavan Nair told News Agencies that a manned mission could be expected by 2015. Made the necessary updates to Proposal Phase and Manned Sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pravictor (talk • contribs) 16:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removed my edits to the Proposal Phase inspite of providing references. Please undo it. 125.99.99.53 (talk) 17:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone clarify why Pakistan "can never launch a lunar mission" with citations? Altair 13 (talk) 11:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. It was vandalism. --Josh Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 12:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because they can never, ok? if u think they can do it anytime soon pls gimme some citation. they cannot even build a satellite what more lunar probe lol gimme a break. i know there r other countries who also cannot do so and u can add on their names i got no problems. i started it off with pakistan ok?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.75.186 (talk) 14:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC) )[reply]

added "EXPAND" template so if u think other countries cannot then add them in OK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.75.186 (talk) 14:48, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ip 60 is a vandal every time you edit you make a POV edits just look at his edit history p.s whenever he adds this lame "countrys that cant" i will revert his edits and thats all folks

LOL I will also undo .. n pls stop vandalising chocolate chip article bye bye

chocolate chips looks like your not really well in the head freind

OK ip 60 is *bad* how about ip 218?

hes a sock and vandal wow now your really in for it 86.158.177.181 (talk) 15:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ip 60 has morhped into ip208 using another computer or different isp hes a sock check both of there edit historys there all on the same subject SPACE 86.158.177.181 (talk) 15:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Created a new section and added S Korea. Please expand it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pravictor (talk • contribs) 02:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every proposed manned mission launch date has dubious tag without an explantion as to why. how about removing the tags or making an arugument. also change the "launch date" to "proposed launch date" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.209.181.185 (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing. I'll remove the tags and clarify the header. --Tango (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those on the list have been completed and are now "past" lunar missions. Should they not be removed (rather than the colour changed)? If there is a similar list for past missions, they could always be added there. --81.23.54.142 (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In about 50 years, some of the information on this page(impacts and crashes) will be worth a fortune to treasure hunters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.198.155 (talk) 12:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Why not state the obvious truth, which is that there isn't currently any serious plan anywhere in the world to land humans on the Moon for the foreseeable future ? Hektor (talk) 09:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Essentially, because Wikipedia does not do synthesis of other published facts, as that would be original research. However, if you have a reliable source for your claim, and can add a citation, then by all means, feel free to add the claim to the article. After all, anyone can edit Wikipedia, you too! Cheers. N2e (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• There is a planned ORION mission to the Moon for 2019. For some reason, someone here wanted to surpress that.Ericl (talk) 20:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Chandrayaan-3 is listed as having a launch date of 2015. However the reference that stated it ("India to launch manned moon mission by 2015") is nowhere to be found. Chandrayaan-3 itself points to the "Indian human spaceflight programme" wiki page. However, it is stated on that page that "There is no time frame set for this mission as of now, with scientists admitting in private it may not happen in this decade, as ISRO does not have a human-rated launch vehicle and there is a budgetary constraints from the Union Government." So should this entry be deleted or moved to the "Cancelled or indefinitely postponed" list? Showmebeef (talk) 07:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of proposed missions to the Moon. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080421045542/http://www.space.com:80/spacenews/archive03/landerarch_051903.html to http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive03/landerarch_051903.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]