The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 05:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Tile inspection on Starship

• ... that the flaps of SpaceX's Starship spacecraft do not generate lift but instead induce drag to control the spacecraft's descent? Source: "The vehicle therefore uses four steel landing flaps, positioned near the front and rear of the vehicle, to control its descent. This is much like a skydiver uses their arms and legs to control a free-fall. 'It's quite different from anything else ... we're doing a controlled fall,' Elon Musk said during a Starship update in 2019. 'You're trying to create drag rather than lift - it's really the opposite of an aircraft.'" [1]
  • ALT1:... that the design of launch towers' arms allows them to "catch" and recover (retrieve?) the Super Heavy booster of SpaceX's Starship system? Source 1: "[...] SpaceX’s first custom-built ‘launch tower’ is a sort of backbone or anchor point for several massive, mechanical arms that will accomplish the actual tasks of servicing – and, perhaps, catching – Starships and Super Heavy boosters." [2] Source 2: "One month after SpaceX stacked Starship’s South Texas ‘launch tower’ to its full height, the company has installed the first arm on what amounts to the backbone of 'Mechazilla.'" [3]
  • ALT2: ... that SpaceX's Starship rocket has twice the lift capacity of the Saturn V? If Starship then launched as an expendable, payload would be ~250 tons. What isn’t obvious from this chart is that Starship/Super Heavy is much denser than Saturn V. [4]

Improved to Good Article status by CactiStaccingCrane (talk). Self-nominated at 07:48, 14 September 2021 (UTC).

• The hooks look interesting enough, though I will suggest slight paraphrasing for each.

• • ALT3: ... that the flaps of SpaceX's Starship spacecraft do not generate lift but instead induce drag to control the spacecraft's descent
  • ALT1b: ... that the design of launch towers' arms allows them to "catch" and recover (retrieve?) the Super Heavy booster of SpaceX's Starship system? 

No problems for ATL2.

Rectify these. Will leave to the promoters to decide which of the hooks are better.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:01, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Alt1 is a completely new design that has never been tested in any way and that is likely to change a lot in the future based on test results. I would avoid that for now. --mfb (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@ZKang123: I like that you suggested alts! I'm not seeing that a full review has been done, so I couldn't promote just yet. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 00:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Apologies. Was busy and missed out this review. Looks good to go I guess. --ZKang123 (talk) 00:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@ZKang123: to be clear, the article is new enough, long enough, plagiarism free, etc.? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 01:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

It has just recently attainer GA when it was nominated at the time, so its passable.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

• ZKang123, nominations for DYK have to meet a certain number of requirements before approval, and while you might have checked, I can't see that that's been verified in the nom page. You might want to reference the reviewing guide in taking a full review. Let me know when you've finished that (i also find it helpful to use the reviewer's template), and sorry for the holdup! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 05:15, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

a full review is needed for this nomination, unfortunately. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:46, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• The ALTs seem a little in the weeds to me. The topic is naturally interesting because it's in the news, so I'd consider going with something simpler, like:

  ALT4 ... that SpaceX's reusable Starship launch vehicle has twice the thrust as the Apollo Program's Saturn V?

  ALT5 ...that SpaceX's reusable Starship launch vehicle will carry more than 10 million pounds (4.5 kt) of propellant?

Cheers, ((u|Sdkb)) ^talk 07:54, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

this might have gotten moved back for some reason theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 23:20, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Article is plenty long enough, was nominated within 7 days of promotion, is well cited and is neutral, lending due weight to the perspectives surrounding the spacecraft's environmental impact and safety. Fixed minor instance of close paraphrasing. @CactiStaccingCrane: The majority of the prose for "Criticism and controversies" section is duplicated from earlier sections in the article. This isn't a plagiarism concern AFAIK because it's within the same article, but it's a bit tacky and might cause the article to become inconsistent in case one section is updated without the other in turn. I recommend paring the specific critiques in each section down to a sentence or two and link to the "Criticism ..." section with ((Section link)); for example: Some residents of Boca Chica Village, Brownsville, and environmental activists criticized the Starship development program for several reasons (see § Criticism and controversies for more details). If this is dealt with I approve of ALT4. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:32, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Am fixing it right now. @DigitalIceAge: Done. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@CactiStaccingCrane: Looks good now, thanks! One more thing: I just realized the "twice that of a Saturn V rocket" bit isn't cited in the article. For the hook to be approved the corresponding sentence in the article has to have a citation at the end of it. I could add a citation to Elon's tweet linked above, but I think a secondary source would be more verifiable. Here's Astronomy magazine, the BBC, Business Insider, and The Conversation stating the same thing, if you wanna take a pick. DigitalIceAge (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@DigitalIceAge: I think that the BBC one is a bit more reliable than the bunch. I will add the source now :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 00:24, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, ALT4 should be good to go now! DigitalIceAge (talk) 06:00, 29 October 2021 (UTC)