Talk:Sally Ride/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

First Known LGBTQ+ Astronaut

I see around the time of her death there was discussion on the talk page about her being the first known LGBTQ+ astronaut, with some questioning the veracity of this. Now that we're a few years removed and have confirmation from Tam O'Shaughnessy and biographies of Sally Ride published posthumously, this is no longer a question for debate and is verified. Her existence as the first known LGBTQ+ astronaut is as important a first as being the first American woman in space, and I want to open the discussion here about adding it to the second sentence. If we are going to list one of her firsts (being the first American woman in space), her other simultaneous first should be mentioned right alongside it. Sevey13 (talk) 17:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Seeing no objections or discussion after almost a month, I made the change. Sevey13 (talk) 22:52, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how this important at all, especially for the intro. Her homosexuality wasn't known when she went into space or for many years to come. Furthermore, the phrasing "fist known LGBTQ+ astronaut" suggests that there were "unknown" ones. Given the pretty limited number of astronauts, that is highly unlikely and speculative. Finally, there is no need to put Sally Ride's astronautical achievements under the whole acronym banner. Str1977 ^(talk) 06:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there Str1977. I see you went ahead and reverted the edit without bring it to the talk page first. If you disagree with the edit that is so fresh and that has been brought up recently in Talk, I appreciate the courtesy of at least giving a minor window before making your change. I left a whole month for comments and saw none so made the edit. At least a few hours would be kind before making your revert.

That out of the way, I would point a few things out I disagree with in your argument.

- It does not matter whether her sexuality was known publicly at the time, it was certainly known to her. She was same-sex attracted when she went to space. That is factual. In the opening paragraph, it mentions she was the first woman and the youngest person. What specific justification do you offer that this is any less important? I'd point out the fact that her sexuality plays a huge role, as portrayed in the Sherr Lynn biography, as closed to an "authorized biography" as you're going to get on her, and recent scholarship also acknowledges this "first" alongside the others (see the sources in the next point).

- In addition, the phrasing "first known LGBTQ+ astronaut" is accurate. You say it is speculative. What specifically is speculative about it? As queer identities were downright illegal even when Sally Ride went to space, they were often hidden, so to say absolutely that all astronauts who preceded her were straight is also speculative. This wording is also consistent with modern scholarship and articles about her, I didn't make it up. See: https://www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/sally-ride, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/recommended-the-real-sally-ride-astronaut-science-champion-and-lesbian, https://www.businessinsider.com/sally-ride-first-gay-astronaut-nasa-2015-10/ With this in mind, what wording would you offer as an alternative that is factual, concise, and comprehensive?

- I admit, I don't understand your last statement. What do you mean by "there is no need to put Sally Ride's astronautical achievements under the whole acronym banner."?

Please bring some specific sources to the discussion. I'd be curious how you'd like this discussion to go. Are you hoping to bring in additional voices to weigh in on this? If so, we can get in touch with a moderator and get that started. Sevey13 (talk) 06:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Your first line is obviously false: "I see you went ahead and reverted the edit without bring it to the talk page first."

As you can see above - and as you know as you posted here - I did bring it to the talk page first. I also did not "revert" anything but I edited in line with what I consider to be a better wording. Your initial change was based on nothing but your view and nobody responding - a lack of response is no surprise on this not-so-prominent article.

NB. You had no issue with immediately reverting my changes. Should I know revert your revert again, based on your example?

As for the three issues here:

• Overall importance: Sally Ride's sexuality did not play a "huge role" during her life time, let alone when she made her trip into space. At the time, she was celebrated as the first US woman in space - he was not celebrated as the first lesbian in space. That's a retrospective label linked to the revelation that she was lesbian. - IF it should be included in the intro it should done like (and forgive any rough edges of the wording) "Then and then Sally Ride was revealed to be a lesbian. As such she became known as the first LGBT* astronaut.
  (NB. Has that biography been authorized by Mrs Ride herself, during her lifetime? It nevertheless has to be treated like any other sources. WP cannot simply parrot it.)
• First known LGBT* austronaut implies that there are unknown "LGBT astronauts" - that is speculation at best. We should shirk this concern by writing "became known as the first LGBT* astronaut".
• Finally - but least importantly - I don't see the need to but Sally Ride under an evergrowing, cumbersome acronym. It used to be LGB, then LGBT, now you wrote LGBTQ+. Sally Ride was a lesbian, she was - to my and your knowledge - neither B, nor T nor Q. If we really need that acronym, restrict to the more the substantive LGBT.

Finally, this is not about "bringing in some specific sources" but a matter of WP principles like "no undue weight" and NPOV and, in case of the second issues, verifiability. Str1977 ^(talk) 11:54, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to work towards a solution here, and since the internet is such an impersonal medium do me a favor and read this imagining me sitting with you in a bar or something with each of our preferred drinks in hand, chatting cordially. It's what I'm doing when I read yours.

From what I'm seeing in your comment, there are two separate but important, questions you're asking, the first being is "Sally Ride was the first known LGBQT+ astronaut" the right way to word it, and the second is does this statement belong in the second sentence. Do I have it right? If not please forgive me, because that's the assumption I'm going under in my response.

Your first point, the overall importance, seems to get at that second question, "does this belong in the second sentence?" I say yes, and modern scholarship/journalism on Ride seems to agree. The crux of the argument you're making, if I understand it correctly, is that because Sally Ride was not announced at the time as the first gay/lesbian/bi/[insert LGBTQ+ identity word here] astronaut when she first flew, that it does not rise to the level of importance of being in the opening. I'm curious what evidence would you need to see to feel that her sexuality played a "huge role" in her life, as you put it?

Do you have criteria that you'd need to see to be satisfied? When she was in graduate school she was in a relationship with Molly Tyson, many years before she became an astronaut. She was in a relationship with Tam O'Shaughnessy for 27 years, a pretty significant length of time. She also dated men, even married one for a few years in a private ceremony before getting quietly divorced a few years later. All this is documented in the sources I shared last time. The romantic relationships she had with the people around her, both men and women would seem quite significant to her. The timeline clearly shows she was attracted to women during her NASA years. Just because it wasn't known publicly at the time, it was known to her. It doesn't matter that she wasn't called the "first lesbian in space" at the time or something like that. It was still part of her, a part she clearly had to keep undisclosed during her NASA years. If she had come out, scholars/journalists who have covered her legacy agree she would almost assuredly have been fired and her name wouldn't be the one in the history books. (See: Sherr Lynn's biography, https://medium.com/the-vintage-space/gay-astronauts-a-final-frontier-9892d0987fa0, https://www.businessinsider.com/sally-ride-first-gay-astronaut-nasa-2015-10, https://prospect.org/culture/books/astronaut-sally-ride-burden-first/, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z7PWRZHEnA, and while it doesn't talk about NASA this article hits on concerns about post-career difficulty if she came out https://www.npr.org/2014/06/17/322800422/sherr-s-book-reveals-details-of-astronaut-sally-ride-s-personal-life) I will be the first to acknowledge many modern sources point back to Sherr Lynn's biography, so easily accessible articles online will likely be reviews or discussions about her biography. This means if someone doesn't see that source as authoritative obviously the whole thing comes crumbling down. However, Lynn worked directly with Ride for decades, interviewed Ride, O'Shaugnessy, Tyson, the men Ride dated/married, and of course many others not involved or privy to her romantic interests. She gives an exhaustive bibliography and source list in her closeing pages. I'd point to the book's wide citation, coupled with Lynn's comprehensive research, as proof that it is the current authoritative work and worth leaning on, and Lynn asserts her sexuality played a "huge role."

The rest of your comments seem to address the question of correct wording. In terms of the wording "first known," I hear and understand the argument that it does imply speculation. Do you hear and understand my argument that to state definitively that she was the first LGBTQ+ astronaut is making an equally speculative claim? I ask because I want to make sure we're not talking past each other here. One need only read "The Astronaut Wives Club" to see how much many of the earlier astronauts saw their marriage to a woman as simply a box to check on the way to being an astronaut, and that book goes into great detail on the social pressures of the astronauts presenting the 'perfect American family' to counter the perceived Communist threat. Compellingly, if you do an internet search for "first known" or "earliest known," you'll see it is a term commonly used in fields of study where earlier examples may exist but just haven't been found (biology, etymology, ancient history, music studies, etc.). I'd make an assertion that LGBTQ+ history is a similar field, where the constant evolution of language, identity, and social perception make it difficult to make too many definitive claims. What is phrasing we can use that finds a middle ground, neither declaring definitely that she was the absolute first when that is an unknown while also keeping the focus on her and not the astronauts who preceded her?

Thank you for clarifying what you meant about the banner. To that point about what language to use, I actually agree with you. I think you'll find most people even within the LGBTQ+ community don't like that acronym, or LGBT, or GLBT or any of the various flavors of the alphabet soup as it's long and bothersome and has plenty of baggage, but they have a branding problem. Other terms have been floated out there like GSM or SAGA (I believe GSM is the most popular, but that's speculation ;) ), but none are nearly as well known as the alphabet soup, so that's out a bit of our hands haha. I personally would feel uncomfortable assigning Ride the "lesbian" label as you suggest, as it's not one she used herself. Her obituary simply said she had been living with Tam O'Shaughnessy for 27 years. She also dated men, even marrying one. Did she see these heteronormative relationships as genuine, or were they cover? Would that make her bisexual? Pansexual? That would be speculation indeed, and since she's dead we can't ask her definitively. That's why I trended instead towards the LGBTQ+, as it is an umbrella term. I've been searching around for Wikipedia's official position/style guide on this and haven't found something that definitively says "use THIS," so I'd be fine revising down to LGBT as opposed to LGBTQ+ or some other variation. I have asked for clarification from WikiProject LGBT studies. Hopefully someone from there will chime in here.

I'll wait to hear what you have to say before making another attempt at phrasing to see what common ground we can find. Sevey13 (talk) 07:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not certain that this is second-sentence stuff. It isn't a key driver of her notability; almost all her notability was established before this was a public fact, it seems to me.

The phrase "first known LGBTQ+ in space" is a problem, not because it indicates that there were unknown LGBTQ+ astronauts (it doesn't, it allows for it; astronauting began at a time when a large portion of the LGBTQ+ populace was closeted) but because it makes it sound like she was known LGBTQ+ when she was in space, which is not the case. I haven't read the biographies - did she even consider herself to be LGBTQ+ when she was in space? Her last trip was before the start of her long term relationship, and people's view of their own sexuality is malleable.

"LGBTQ+" is itself a problem here, because + gets so variably defined at times that it is hard to tell what it may include or exclude, and thus what other astronauts might qualify. LGBT should be sufficient in this case.

My suggestion: Dump it, and instead put something more detailed and nuanced as the penultimate sentence of the intro. "Having been married to astronaut Steven Hawley during her spaceflight years and in a private, long-term relationship with former Women's Tennis Association player Tam O'Shaughnessy in her years after, she is the earliest space traveler to have been recognized as LGBT." --Nat Gertler (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I came here from WT:LGBT. After taking a look through the discussion and history, I do think I agree with NatGertler that there is an unfortunate implication here: that she was known as LGBT in 1983. I don't think that is the most natural reading, nor the one that I had at first, but it is a reasonable one that I can see. I prefer Nat Gertler's proposed wording ("Having been married to astronaut Steven Hawley during her spaceflight years and in a private, long-term relationship with former Women's Tennis Association player Tam O'Shaughnessy in her years after, she is the earliest space traveler to have been recognized as LGBT."), not only because it avoids the implication, but also because it feels like more natural prose. Adding 'first' qualifiers, one after the other, is fine—but when there's a way to avoid it, and do so naturally, I think that's preferable.

As for LGBT vs. LGBTQ+, my understanding is that it is up to stylistic preference. I think the tides are turning and reliable sources now mostly use LGBTQ+, but we should probably mirror whatever language is used in RSs and scholarship in relation to Sally Ride herself. And I'd be happy to share my notes, but from what I see in a quick search from scholarship, it seems to be LGBT. But I did not look at things outside of academia, so ymmv—but also, it does not matter too much; just pick one and move on. Urve (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC) And I want to add, since I forgot- while her notability was not originally for being a lesbian astronaut, I think that her modern notability is rooted deeply in this fact, so I do feel it should be in the lead. Second sentence or not, probably not. Urve (talk) 20:43, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• Support Nat Gertler's suggested sentence and placement. Having it in the second sentence and next to "first American woman" was very misleading as to the order of events, as outlined above. LGBT is standard on Wikipedia over LGBTQ+. Crossroads ^-talk- 21:19, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Given that days have passed with no objections and a couple specific shows of support for my wording, I have added it to the intro. That does not mean that further comments and adjustments cannot be made. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all for helping keep this conversation going. I was pretty busy the past week and didn't have a chance to check. I like the suggested wording. Thanks again. Sevey13 (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Jsusky (talk) 19:59, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

"she is the earliest space traveler to have been recognized as LGBT"

Really? ALL four letters?? Perhaps I misunderstand - is that a term *she used*?

Given her date-of-birth, her personal policy may have been none-of- your-F#C#in'-business.

"LGBTQ+" (in the topic title) how does this sort of convolution add any value - except to state what is important to self-important observers? IS such a self-reflecting mirror useful?

Note that today's entries (2021jul01) on Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova do not address "precendence" (both "out" in 1981)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2021

Change the *19 reference to include Allan McDonald https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/03/10/utahn-allan-mcdonald-dies/ https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover Allan McDonald should be included in the comments regarding the Space Challenger explosion as he was the scientist with Morton Thiokol who refused the sign off on the launch because of the O-rings. McDonald persistently cited three reasons for a delay: freezing overnight temperatures that could compromise the booster rocket joints; ice forming on the launchpad and spacecraft that could damage the orbiter heat tiles at launch; and a forecast of rough seas at the booster rocket recovery site. He just died and he needs to be included so that people can read the full information as it is important. 2600:1702:10B0:38A0:784D:2F72:7DA0:CB02 (talk) 19:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC) 2600:1702:10B0:38A0:784D:2F72:7DA0:CB02 (talk) 19:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done. I've changed the wording to say that Boisjoly wasn't the only person to voice concerns. I won't mention McDonald by name because the sources don't show a clear connection to Ride. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 00:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

infobox ambiguity

In the infobox, in "​Partner(s) Tam O'Shaughnessy (1985–2012; her death)", change "her death" to "Ride's death". Otherwise it is not clear which one died, without checking the rest of the article. 67.160.203.180 (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Good catch. Change made. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Sally Ride (1984).jpg scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture File:Sally Ride (1984).jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for May 26, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-05-26. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Sally Ride (May 26, 1951 – July 23, 2012) was an American physicist and astronaut. She joined NASA in 1978, and in 1983 became the first American woman in space. She was the third woman in space overall, after Soviet cosmonauts Valentina Tereshkova (1963) and Svetlana Savitskaya (1982). Ride had completed eight months of training for her third flight when the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster occurred. She served on the two panels that investigated this accident and the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster.

Photograph credit: NASA; restored by Coffeeandcrumbs

Recently featured:

• Adonis blue
• Helsinki Cathedral
• The Crucifixion of Saint Wilgefortis

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2021

Please list Sally Rides life partner along with her spouse.

O'Shaughnessy was the romantic partner of NASA Astronaut Sally Ride from 1985 until Ride's death in 2012.[22]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tam_O%27Shaughnessy 2600:6C55:7B00:1144:2C69:7611:5524:77E3 (talk) 14:03, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

 Already done This is already covered in the article ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2021

Sally Ride was 51 years old when she died from Pancreatic Cancer. 45.51.105.131 (talk) 23:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 February 2021 and 18 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Samarillion.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2022

Can someone swap the last two paragraphs of the Life and Death section? They're not in chronological order and the article does not read well as a result. 209.52.88.62 (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

•  Done casualdejekyll 17:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Bear Ride marital info

@Hawkeye7: I removed the sentences about Bear Ride's marital history. As she is a non-public figure, I don't think information about her marital history and the name of her current spouse should be included on Sally Ride's page. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Balon Greyjoy (talk · contribs) 16:28, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Nice work on this article. I'm planning to do the review this weekend! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 16:28, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

GA Progress Template

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Prose

Early life

Bear being ordained later in life isn't relevant to Ride's early life and doesn't need to be included.

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Did Ride ever join the Daughters of the American Revolution? If not, I don't think this merits mentioning.

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

When she was in Europe, the family was traveling, correct? I think that's worth mentioning, otherwise its makes it sound like they moved, full-time, to a place in Europe.

Yes, for a whole year. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

How does Mommaerts fit into Ride's narrative? She tough human physiology, and the next sentence says that Ride wanted to become an astrophysicist.

It comes later. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

What was the advanced math class? Was that during her senior year of high school, the summer before college, or did she take time off before college and take that class? Unless it is something particularly advanced, I don't think an individual class that she took merits mentioning.

It was during the summer before she went to Swarthmore. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The dean of admissions for Swarthmore College doesn't need a by-name mention; it's enough to say that Ride was admitted on a full tennis scholarship.

No, it is important later on. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I think saying "September 18, 1968" for starting college is too exact; is that the day she moved in, the first day of classes, etc.? I think it's enough to say "September 1968"

I'm always precise, as it makes it easier for people to paraphrase the Wikipedia. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Then it should be stated what that date represents. "Entered" could mean set foot on campus, moved in, began orientation, started classes, etc.

Any update on what this date means? The other school-related dates just use a month-year or even a year.

"Enter" means "gained admission to the university". It is the date of commencement of studies at a university. [1] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

"Gained admission" is not the same thing as starting classes; if anything, that would have been months prior to September 1968 (assuming she was admitted during spring semester 1968 to enroll in fall 1968). If September 18th is the day she began classes, add that, but it is not clear from the current context. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Changed to "commenced classes". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:35, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Was she very involved in golf and field hockey? It seems like tennis was her main sport, so I'm not sure how much she was playing the other sports.

She made the hockey team. The point is that she did play other sports. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Link "straight sets"

Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not clear what Title IX has to do with Ride being homesick.

Added a bit of clarification. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"she announced that she was returning to California in January 1970" Since she wasn't a public figure during her college career, I think it's sufficient to say "she returned to California in January 1970" as her announcement was probably just to her friends and family.

I think she might have told the college as well. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Her grades in two UCLA classes don't need to be mentioned.

Few people excel in both arts and sciences. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

When referring to her status as the only woman in the physics class, is that for the quantum mechanics class or a different class?

The only physics major. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Did she have an affair with the TA, or was she dating him? It's been awhile since I read the Scherr book, but I don't recall the relationship being an affair. Additionally, I don't think her college ex needs a by-name mention.

It is relevant later on. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything about this being an affair in Sherr's book.

Sherr says "a real romance - physical but not sexual... But it was very intense. Sally was not trivial or superficial. We spent an awful lot of time together in a relatively short time". (p. 41) together". Changed to "She was romantically involved" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"Her foray into professional tennis was less successful," Less successful than what? This comes right after the sentence on dating Tompkins, so it reads like her tennis career is being compared to her love life.

Tweaked wording. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I think this is better. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

How was she unsuccessful as a tennis player? Did she lose tournaments? Not make enough money? Realize she didn't like it? It's not clear what her setbacks were.

Expanded on this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it needs to be stated that Ride decided to focus on academics. I think "Ride decided to concentrate on academics. She applied for a transfer to Stanford University as a junior. " could be shortened to "Realizing she wouldn't succeed as a professional tennis player, she applied to transfer to Stanford University"

Trimmed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"By coincidence, Fred Hargadon was now the dean of admissions there," I'm assuming this is meant to imply that Hargadon wanted to admit her? It's not clear from this, it just says that he was the dean of admissions? If he played an integral role in Ride getting admitted, its worth mentioning, but it's not clear how much him being there helped get her in. I wouldn't expect the dean of admissions to personally know many of the applicants/students. If anything, I would expect him to not want to accept her after she dropped out of Swarthmore.

Hargadon was the best in the business. He knew all the details of all his students, and followed their careers with interest. He personally approved her admission. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any of this info in the Sherr book; it the inclusion of Hargadon's info mostly seems as a set up for the anecdote about Ride saying he admitted her twice to avoid making a mistake. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"in another of the happy coincidences that smoothed her life, she was readily accepted by the same man who had welcomed her to Swarthmore" (p. 42) For more about him, see [2] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant that I'm not seeing anything particularly special about Hargadon and his role in Ride's life, just that he coincidentally was Dean of Admissions at both schools she applied to. I think it's a fun fact, but a trivial detail for a Wikipedia article. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

To keep it chronological, info about Ride's time at Stanford should be before her graduation info, grad school, etc.

The two occur simultaneously, so we have one paragraph on her academic work, and one on her other activities. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"The two had met on the tennis circuit as juniors." This should maybe say "as teenagers" since "junior" has also been used to refer to a school year.

Damn. Changed to "junior tennis players" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Tyson only number six" Remove "only"

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Ride and Tyson became lovers." I feel like this should say "Ride and Tyson began a relationship"

Would Americans assume that sex was involved? Do you want "lesbian relationship"? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I can't speak for all Americans, but I think the term "lovers" implies a more casual, sexual relationship. The fact that their relationship went on for years and seems more serious than purely physical contact makes me think the term "lovers" in inadequate. Regarding the use of "lesbian relationship", my opinion is not to use that term. I can't speak from the perspective of someone in a same-sex relationship, but I think calling it a "lesbian relationship" implies it is somehow different (and possibly lesser) than a heterosexual relationship. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Would "Ride and Tyson began a relationship" work better? I think it is a more appropriate word. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Changed to "sexual relationship". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Why not just use the term "relationship" like when describing her other relationships? I would assume her relationships with Hawley and Coulson also were sexual relationships. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 19:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Very well. Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:50, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think Bear working at the pro shop at the tennis camp where her sister worked is needed

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Selection and training

I don't think its necessary to say who she gave as references. If nothing else, I would have it say "ex-partners" rather than "three lovers"

"Partners" would be incorrect. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Regardless, I don't think who she gave as a personal reference is a significant detail.

I see it as very important, and it can be compared with other candidates. Rhea Seddon, for example, chose James Pate, the head of surgery at the hospital where she worked; Jose Guma, her flying instructor; and Jim Arnhart, the administrator of Rutherford Hospital. Very different. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

If it must be included, fine, but I don't think "lovers" is the appropriate word. That makes it seem like she just picked previous sexual partners, where she was in a relationship with all of these people at some point.

It is Sherr's term. Changed to "people she had been in relationships with". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't think her treadmill score is necessary to include, as there's no basis for comparison (was she the best in the group, how fast it was going, etc)

I wanted to emphasise her physical fitness, having just said it fell short of elite athlete level. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

But it's not really clear how impressive this is, as there's no mention of how far she ran or how fast she was going. I'm sure Ride was physically fit and covered a significant distance in 17 minutes, but that isn't apparent from the text. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Very well. Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Writing a one-page essay about why she wanted a job doesn't seem overly involved; I don't think that merits mentioning.

Part of the application process. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider what is effectively a cover page to be a significant question in a job application. There's no mention of the forms she had to fill out that included her personal info, or the questions she had to answer in her interviews.

The forms were the standard application forms for a civil service job. The questions differed from candidate to candidates; they were more interested in the way you responded rather than the answers themselves. Sherr notes that they asked her what she did for fun. (pp. 1-2) She quotes the one page essay (pp. 67-68) but doesn't tell us what other questions were asked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

It isn't a make or break, but I consider a one page essay on why someone wants a job to be a trivial detail.

I don't think her starting GS-12 salary should be included, as there are no other mentions of her salary throughout the article, when she presumably made less as a grad student and more as a seasoned astronaut and a college professor.

I think readers would be interested in how much an astronaut made. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"bought a unit" Maybe something like "bought a condominium", as I think "unit" is a colloquialism.

It is not a colloquialism, and not the same as a condominium. Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Was Colson already in Houston? If they moved together, I think it should say "moved with Colson" as "moved in" implies he already had a place there.

Clarified that Colson took the job in Houston so they could stay together. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"He became the only unmarried astronaut candidate's partner." This makes it sound like a lot of the astronaut candidates had relationships with married people. I don't think it's a necessary detail, especially since they broke up within a year of them moving down to Houston.

It is an important detail; NASA were okay with unmarried couples. This would come as a surprise to readers more familiar with NASA policies in the 1960s. (And when I worked at EDS in Texas two decades later, women were fired for this.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't recall a policy against unmarried astronauts, just that early NASA astronauts, like the bulk of the 1950s/1960s test pilot community were all white, married men. NASA clearly didn't have a problem with her marital status if they hired her.

Yes. Two of the six women were married (Fisher and Lucid), and Resnik was divorced. Just a few years before, being divorced would have sank Resnik's application. But Ride wasn't just single, she was in a de facto relationship, and that indicates a considerable shift since the 1950s and 1960s in what was still a fairly conservative workplace. (Homosexuality was still against policy though.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Seeing as this is also the first time women were admitted into the Astronaut Corps, I think its clear that things were changing. I just don't think it needs to be emphasized that Sally Ride was the first astronaut candidate with a boyfriend, not a husband.

A boyfriend she was living with who was treated by NASA as an astronaut spouse. I think it is an important point, especially since it is the only such case I am aware of. There was - and remains - a preference for married people in astronaut selection. In part that is a carry over from the US military, where marriage is far more common than in US civilian life for economic reasons, build even among the civilians marriage is the norm. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

"ignored the rules, and let the more proficient mission specialist candidates fly the aircraft" It's unclear if they were breaking the rules from this sentence. Were the candidates just flying the aircraft (which it seems like they could do above 5,000 feet) or were they taking off/landing/doing prohibited activities.

Clarified this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"John Fabian even had her fly "under the hood", with the windows blacked out and using instruments only." This is pretty standard training for instrument-only flying; was this expressly forbidden? If the mission specialists were expected to be able to fly in an emergency, I don't know why NASA wouldn't be encouraging them to get proficient in this.

They weren't expected to land, only to eject. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The article should answer if this is expressly forbidden, if Ride was breaking rules, etc. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"Rick Hauck allowed her to fly a prototype Boeing 747" The significance of this isn't clear. Why was Boeing lending its prototype aircraft for astronauts to fly around (and let unqualified individuals fly)?

They didn't know she was unqualified until he told them. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

From the text, it's not clear how this happened. Were astronauts routinely flying the Boeing prototype aircraft?

Not routinely. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

My point is, its an out-of-place statement that has no further context. I don't know any of the specifics, but it doesn't really make sense without more elaboration, which I don't think is necessary as its not like Ride became a commercial pilot.

Deleted then. I note in passing that the first woman to officially fly the 747 did so in 1981. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

"Ride enjoyed flying so much she took private flying lessons and earned her private pilot's license. She bought a part interest in a Grumman Tiger aircraft, which she would fly on weekends." This could be combined, as private flying lessons are required for her to get her PPL. I would just say "Ride earned her private pilot's license and bought a part interest in a Grumman Tiger aircraft."

I think the text is fine. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The point is that she took lessons on her own time and with her own money; with your wording the reader might assumed that NASA gave it to her. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

What happened to her dating Hoot Gibson? It's mentioned that they started dating, and then it jumps to her dating Hawley.

Rhea Seddon stole him from her. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

There's no mention of his and Ride's relationship ending. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Sherr only says "briefly dated fellow AsCan Robert "Hoot" Gibson" (p. 118) soon after she split with Colson. Tweaked the wording. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"and considered themselves engaged" Were they engaged? Did they move in together quickly, or was this in the months leading up to the wedding? I think its sufficient to just say they got married, as there wasn't a long span of time from when they started dating to getting married, so it's not like they lived together for years before the wedding.

For a year or so. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

So why not just say "they moved in together, and became engaged" Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Because that might imply that there was a ceremony or announcement (Steve telling Hoot while jogging doesn't count). Followed Sherr's wording. She speculates that this may have been prompted by Billie Jean King's May 1981 palimony lawsuit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm assuming they discussed getting married? Assuming they both agreed to it, I think that constitutes getting engaged, rather than just considering themselves engaged. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:26, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, "considered themselves engaged" is Sherr's wording, and I'm hewing to it. It is not clear that this was shared even with close family and friends. There were certainly none of the formalities of engagement. It was unlike Ride to make firm plans a year out; with O'Shaughnessy she recommitted even few years. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

"Ride never took her husband's name." Link taking the husband's last name, and also, maybe just say "Ride did not take her husband's last name"

What article is this you want linked to? It is still a common practice in the United States, but until the 1970s it was a legal requirement in the United States. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I think we had this conversation on the Lisa Nowak GA discussion. On that page, [[Maiden and married names#Use husband's family name|changed her last name]] is used. I don't know how common taking the husband's last name is outside of the US.

Not very common at all outside the English-speaking world. Illegal in many countries. Linked as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

STS-7

Shouldn't it say that she served as "a ground-based..." rather than "the ground-based..." as there are multiple CAPCOMs per mission?

Changed as suggested. Wish I had a lisst of the Shuttle CAPCOMs, Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Due to her sex," This seems like an odd-way to refer to her status. Maybe something like "As the first American woman to fly in space,"

Changed as suggested. The wording alluded to the source and Title VII. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"But she confided to Tyson that it was not like stepping onto the Centre Court at Wibbledon. "I'm aware", she told Tyson, "that this is not without risks. I realize I could die."" This isn't encyclopedic information; going to space is obviously not the same as a tennis court, and it makes it seem like nobody ever acknowledged risk in the space program.

That was not the attitude of NASA at the time. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Regardless of of others' opinions, it doesn't change the fact that going to space and playing in a tennis match are not the same. It's an anecdote from Sherr's book, but it's not appropriate for an encyclopedia article.

I don't agree. It shows another side to Ride, and an appreciation of the risks, which were demonstrated in the Challenger disaster three years later. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:04, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm happy to get another opinion on this, but I consider the inclusion of this quote and the Wimbledon comparison outside of GA-level standards. I understand what it is trying to convey, and I think saying something like "She privately voiced her concerns about her safety on the flight to Tyson" would be appropriate. But I think the direct quote and the comparison to a tennis match is unnecessary. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Is there more information about STS-7? What experiments/research was conducted? What did Ride take part in? There's a whole paragraph about the choice of her selection, but the only mention of her role in the mission that she operated the RMS.

If you have a source then I can include it, but my sources do not have anything more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Mention of first photograph of the orbiter in space

Mention of other experiments conducted on STS-7

Added more material on the flight, although I think it properly belongs in the mission article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:04, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Remove meeting Mickey Mouse; meeting a fictional Disney character is not on the same level as the California Governor and New York Mayor.

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Ride told Carolyn Huntoon that she thought that Savitskaya would have easily passed NASA's selection process." This doesn't merit mentioning; it seems like Ride was just praising her. It's not like Ride conducted an evaluation of her during their meeting.

The point is that Savitskaya impressed her professionally as well as personally. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure Savitskaya was an impressive person, but I don't think Ride's assessment belongs, since it's not like she was evaluating her to join the US astronaut corps. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

"The mission also carried the first Shuttle pallet satellite (SPAS-1), which carried ten experiments to study formation of metal alloys in microgravity. Part of Ride's job was to operate the robot arm to deploy and later retrieve SPAS-1, which was brought back to Earth. The orbiter's small Reaction control system rockets were fired while SPAS-1 was held by the remote manipulator system to test the movement on an extended arm. The mission also studied Space adaptation syndrome, a bout of nausea frequently experienced by astronauts during the early phase of a space flight.[22][1] STS-7 was also the first occasion on which a photograph was taken of the Space Shuttle in orbit. Ride manipulated to robot arm into the shape of a "7", as it appeared on the mission patch.[23] Ride found that she was not affected by it and did not require medication for the syndrome.[2]: 180  Bad weather forced the Challenger to land at Edwards Air Force Base in California instead of the runways at KSC.[2]: 165  The mission lasted 6 days, 2 hours, 23 minutes and 59 seconds.[21]"

Could someone take a look at rearranging this paragraph. It appears the sentence about Space Adaptation syndrome and manipulating the robot arm into a 7 should be swapped. Otherwise, currently the paragraph jumps back and forth and just feels awkward to read. Nikarus2370 (talk) 16:03, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Y Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:37, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

STS-41-G

"Savitskaya beat them both when she flew in space" I'm assuming this means that Savitskaya beat them in becoming the first woman to fly in space twice and the first woman to conduct an EVA. But since the previous sentence refers to Ride and Sullivan as the first American women to do these things, it doesn't make sense that a cosmonaut beat them.

Clarified. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Other than SIR-B deployment, did Ride do any other RMS work (e.g. on Sullivan's EVA)? Did she assist with Earth observation?

If you have a source then I can include it, but my sources do not have anything more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

More info about the SIR-B deployment

I think the 343 hours in space should be mentioned elsewhere, as it is cumulative for Ride's career. I think it should be mentioned when stating that she was leaving NASA, or at least start the sentence with "Between her two flights, Ride spent over..."

Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Cancelled mission

There's no mention of a mission being cancelled in this section; the STS-61-M info should be moved up from the next section.

Moved. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Which missions did Ride as CapCom for? Since it is only two missions, they can be individually listed.

Yes, they could be. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"She still performed her astronaut's spouse duties" Is this mostly just going to view the launch?

A series of events. Didn't think it was very interesting. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I would remove mention of it then if the individual events aren't that significant. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, will add them then. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Rogers Commission

"which she co-wrote with Okie" I think Okie merits an explanation here, as the only mention of her is way earlier on the page, and that she was a high school friend of Ride's

Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"They dedicated it to the memory of Mommaerts, their high school teacher" I don't think this needs to be included.

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

After NASA

"Ride researched means by which nuclear warheads could be counted and verified from space, but the end of the Cold War made this much less of an issue." I don't think its accurate to downplay the significance of the US monitoring nuclear proliferation; it's not like the issue went away after the Soviet Union collapsed.

"Instead, in 1989," Remove "Instead"

Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Ride joined Space.com in September 1999, but left in July 2000" What did she do for Space.com?

Friends of mine thought they could strike it rich working for a dot com. I tried to make money buying up failed dot coms and selling their office furniture and equipment. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Is this a Ride quote? I'm assuming she didn't sell Space.com's equipment. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

I shortened the text, I don't think it it needs to be explained that Space.com is a dot-com company. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Death

I added a "who" tag after "people." Was it random attendees, or reported, or O'Shaugnessy, etc. that noticed?

Added "at the event" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Awards and honors

I see another school named after Ride in Orlando. I would remove the "two elementary schools" portion, as that becomes incorrect if schools open/close/rename.

Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

In popular culture

When was the Hadfield/Coleman performance/music release?

It was in 2013. But I can't find a RS. Your assistance would be appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The currently linked ref to The Daily Dot is the only link I can find between Ride On/Ride That Lightning and Sally Ride. Looking at the lyrics for Ride that Lightning, there's not a mention of Sally Ride/women in spaceflight; are we sure they're the same song/in tribute to Ride? Balon Greyjoy (talk) 15:48, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure. Let them tell you themselves. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

If there isn't a WP:RS for it, should we maybe just remove it? While I think it is interesting that Hadfield and Coleman wrote this song, I wouldn't consider it a major event in popular culture to leave out. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Because another editor thought it was. Given that it reliably sourced, I am leaving it in. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:50, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, that is all I am doing. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

@Balon Greyjoy: Can we close this now? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

I'd like to come to a consensus on the Wimbledon sentence and associated quote. Would you like for me to open up a WP:3O for it? Balon Greyjoy (talk) 14:25, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

If that's all that is holding this article up, it has been removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

That was my last holdout. Happy to approve it! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 05:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

LGBT vs lesbian

i changed the wording from 'first astronaut known to be LGBT' to first astronaut known to be lesbian but was reverted. LGBT refers to a community that includes transgender people. Ride was apparently lesbian, gay, bisexual, but she was not trans, therefore i figured when referring to her as the first anything in space, it would be better to refer to her as lesbian because that refers to her individual identity. the other references to LGBT refer to community/community-awards/etc so those seem more correct and i left them alone. but it is odd phrasing to refer to her as the 'first astronaut known to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender' (which is what is being said when using that initialism). it also seems to me that using the initialism amounts to lesbian erasure but im not sure given that i am not part of the lesbian community. also if this discussion results in the word lesbian being restored, should the lead section read 'first astronaut known to be a lesbian', or 'first astronaut known to be lesbian'? .usarnamechoice (talk) 02:12, 12 September 2022 (UTC) edited 02:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand 'LGBT' as a term; it does not imply that a person holds all four identities. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

i believe that LGBT refers to a community. lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender each refers to a member of this community. .usarnamechoice (talk) 02:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Yep. Ride was the first known member of that community to be an astronaut. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:23, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

the current cites for the disputed text are 61 and 62. 61 is Business Insider Australia which mentions "lesbian" five times in the article, and "LGBT" zero times in the article. 62 is Scientific American, which uses "lesbian" once, and "LGBT" zero times. perhaps the text should conform to the citations. :^) .usarnamechoice (talk) 19:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I swapped in some better sources. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:23, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I'll add what I told someone else who I reverted recently when they changed "LGBT" to Lesbian: "Sally Ride never called herself a lesbian, and where possible we defer to how people self-identify. In Lynn Sherr's biography of Ride, done with cooperation of Ride's partner Tam, Tam explains: "We never publicly said, 'We're gay.' We didn't like labels of any kind, but especially the ones referring to sexuality: queer, lesbian, homosexual." In addition, Ride's only legal marriage was to a man. Naturally a woman being married to a man doesn't make her a straight or bisexual, there are plenty of same-gender attracted people who were stuck in heteronormative marriages. However, since Ride isn't alive anymore to explain whether she had romantic feelings for the man she married and the other men she dated, we opted for the more general and vague LGBTQ+ label. A lot of this was discussed and deliberated on the Sally Ride talk page. " In other words, it's not Lesbian erasure, it's being accurate to the best of our ability given the information we have on her. Would she call herself a lesbian today, in 2022? Maybe, maybe not, but since she is deceased we cannot know and therefore it is inaccurate to apply that specific label. This was discussed at length already on the talk page here, feel free to look back through the archives. Sevey13 (talk) 21:00, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

i did look through the archives before posting here, but only found the initial hubbub around this detail becoming known because of her obituary in Archive 1, and the discussion in Archive 2. in Archive 2, @Str1977: objected to the use of the cumbersome initialism on the same grounds that i used. you mention Sally Ride never called herself a lesbian, and where possible we defer to how people self-identify, but Ms Ride also never called herself "LGBT" either so i don't see how that argument fits. i hate to resort to a hypothetical, but what happens when the first transgendered individual goes to space? if Ms Ride is already occupying the "first LGBT" in space position, then is the transgendered individual relegated to second 'LGBT' in space? to me it makes sense to call her the 'first lesbian', and allow the transgendered individual in space to be called the 'first transgendered individual' in space when that day comes. .usarnamechoice (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

First off, I want to say that you're asking good questions. Writing about LGBTQ+ history can be a minefield (trust me, I do it a lot though not here on the wiki), and so being thoughtful and inquisitive, and being open to the complexities of language, is a perfect way to approach this.

I hear what you're saying, and on the surface it would make sense. Sally had an enduring romantic relationship with another woman, therefore it seems logical to call her a lesbian. That might work in casual conversation, but we're talking about an encyclopedic entry here which means we have to apply a standard of rigor to the statement. This is all made so much more complicated because she's dead and we can't just ask her "hey Sally, can we say you're a lesbian in your wiki article?"

When we apply that standard of rigor to the statement that Sally Ride was the first known lesbian in space, it falls apart quickly under that more serious scrutiny. Specifically, it doesn't account for the fact that she was legally married to and had romantic relationships with men which we have no record of her disavowing as "cover relationships." In fact, in that same biography her ex-husband says he believes her love for him was genuine at that time. If Sally did indeed feel love for him at that moment in her life, does this make Sally bisexual? Pansexual? If so, the lesbian label is incorrect. But also labeling her as bisexual is making a claim that we can't really prove.

As already mentioned, it also doesn't account for her specifically rejecting the label of "lesbian" during her life. You are correct that she rejected other labels, too, and an argument could be made that any label would run counter to her wishes. That's where we, as editors, need to strike a balance between respecting someone's self identity and our obligation to historical truth - whatever that may be. We know that Sally had an enduring romantic relationship with another woman whom she loved deeply. This puts her in the extremely broad category we today call LGBTQ+, which includes people who feel they don't fit into any of the various categories/labels that have been constructed to apply to different combinations of attractions and affections. Yes, we can get into a circuitous conversation about a label for people who reject labels, but that would be unproductive and at the end of the day given the structure of Wikipedia, we've got to pick something. Since "lesbian" doesn't accurately capture what we can know about her life, we opted for the broader LGBTQ+ category.

As to your question about what to do when the first known trans astronaut reaches space, while I can't speak for whomever will write that article, presumably they would be called the first transgender astronaut. (Incidentally the term "transgendered," which you used, is considered outdated and possibly offensive depending on the person. I know language can concerning LGBTQ+ identities can change quickly, so I'm bringing it up as I presume you just didn't know.) Calling someone LGBTQ+ is referring to the wide collection of identities, it's not saying they hold every single identity. Anderson Cooper is LGBTQ+, but that doesn't mean he's a lesbian. It's an umbrella term.

It seems like you're interested in learning more about this, so I'm going to recommend some resources. The first few chapters of Leila J. Rupp and Susan K. Freeman's "Understanding and Teaching U.S. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender History" does a really good job of succinctly surveying traditions of LGBTQ+ histories around the world, and also does a great job of summarizing the complexities of applying modern labels to people who are deceased. The Resources section of WikiProject LGBT Studies has a comprehensive set of guidelines for the Wiki standards . If you think trying to figure out how to categorize Sally Ride is tricky, try writing about Kaúxuma Núpika! Sevey13 (talk) 22:53, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

given the structure of Wikipedia, we've got to pick something. Since "lesbian" doesn't accurately capture what we can know about her life, we opted for the broader LGBTQ+ category.

if she specifically rejected the label, then why include her in a community she rejected? Ms Ride sounds like the other option: a woman who loved a woman. there is nothing in the structure of Wikipedia that requires her to be included in a community that she was not part of and specifically rejected, so i don't think "we've got to pick something". the part about her longterm relationship can be summed up as women who have sex with women. .usarnamechoice (talk) 02:15, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2023

I would like to change the Popular Culture Section from not including the play Dr. Ride's American Beach House by Liza Birkenmeier to including the play in the popular section and a brief summary and link. Evidence of purchasing the play The play premiering Off-Broadway

Below is verbatim what I would like to say:

In 2019, Dr. Ride's American Beach House by Liza Birkenmeier premiered Off-Broadway in New York City on October 21, 2019 at Ars Nova. It’s 1983, the evening before Dr. Sally Ride’s historic space flight. Hundreds of miles from the launch, life-long best friends Harriet and Matilda come together for their weekly Two Serious Ladies Book Club to follow the launch. Encounters from friends throughout he nigh bring about passionate opinions and brings to light the absence of opportunities before them as they sit on a sweltering St. Louis rooftop watching life pass them by. Their uncharted desires bump up against American norms of sex and power in this intimate snapshot of queer anti-heroines.] Birkenmeier highlights that Dr. Ride's American Beach House is about the performance and power of the self as a subject and object, especially in terms of desire, and is lensed with Dr. Ride's experience as an astronaut in relation to her LGBTQ identity. The title of the play refers to NASA's Beach House that was used for astronauts like Sally Ride to quarantine before missions.

I have added an abbreviated version of the suggested text to the popular section of article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Consider writing an article on Liza Birkenmeier. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

A second change below:

I would like to change "Ride and Tyson began a relationship. To earn money they gave tennis lessons, and in 1971 and 1972 they were counselors at Dennis Van der Meer's TennisAmerica summer camp at Lake Tahoe, Nevada." to To earn money Ride and her then-girlfriend Tyson gave tennis lessons, and in 1971 and 1972 they were counselors at Dennis Van der Meer's TennisAmerica summer camp at Lake Tahoe, Nevada.

The reason for this hanger being that the grammar surrounding their relationship is awkwardly worded and ambiguous. Prentice Jones (talk) 12:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Changed as suggested. Still awkwardly worded and ambiguous. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

References