Talk:Ulf Merbold/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 20:11, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Taking this one. Review to follow. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:11, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking this on! I'll make some changes now but I'll probably be slow in responding over the next few days (travelling). —Kusma (talk) 20:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Lead
[edit]- Link West Germany, East Germany, ESA, Spacelab D-1, Spacelab D-2
- Linked. —Kusma (talk) 20:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Early life and education
[edit]- Link prisoner of war, cosmonaut, West Germany
- Done.
- "died on 23 February 1948" Rest of article uses Polish date format
- Oh yeah. I made this stupid decision that mdy was probably more suited to the article and I find it hard to remember...
- "dismissed from her service in school " -> "dismissed from her school"
- OK
- East Germany is used before it is linked
- Moved
- Remove the comma after fn 3
- done
- New paragraph before "After graduating"
- OK
- "decided to go to Berlin" Suggest "West Berlin" here.
- "crossing the border" Technically speaking, this was not a border. Suggest rephrasing.
- Turned it into "crossing into West Berlin" and rephrased very slightly. Let me know if you think it still needs work.
- "until the Berlin Wall was built" add the year. (1961)
- Done
- "After the doctorate" -> "After completing his doctorate"
- Done
Astronaut training
[edit]- Link ESA, Memorandum of Understanding, astronaut
- Done
- Define ESA on first mention
- Done
- " so remained payload specialist" -> so remained a payload specialist"
- New paragraph at "In 1982"
- Done
- "an announcement of opportunity" does not sound like English. "a call for applicants"?
- It's in the source and seems to be ESA terminology. I have Uppercased it as an "Announcement of Opportunity" as used also in Krige, Russo & Sebesta 2000.
- " Fifty-three of these underwent an interview and assessment process that considered their engineering skills and physical health from September 1977." -> Fifty-three of these underwent an interview and assessment process in September 1977 that considered their engineering skills and physical health."
- Did a similar reordering.
- " Chrétien later flew to space" -> " Chrétien later flew in space"
- Reworded.
- "The position of payload specialist was introduced by NASA for the first Spacelab flight" The term was in use by 1972; see Croft & Youskauskas 2019, p. 12
- Thanks, I wasn't aware that it had been discussed earlier. Tried to clarify.
- "went to Houston for NASA training in 1978" Should introduce the JSC here
- Done.
- "Merbold did not meet NASA's medical requirements" Any idea what was wrong?
- No idea. Or more precisely, I don't think anything was wrong per se, he just "only" met something like the usual pilot standards but not NASA's near superhuman specifications.
- "From January 1982" -> "in January 1982"
- Done, and replaced "underwent" by "started".
- "the crew at Johnson Space Center" Sounds like we are talking about the flight crew only, which was not the case. And it should be "the Johnson Space Center"
- Reworded. But many sources omit the definite article for the Space Centers, for example Shapland/Rycroft.
First Space Shuttle mission
[edit]- Break paragraph at "The Spacelab mission"
- replace "circa" with "about"
- Paragraph break before "On one of the last days in orbit"
- Use a.m. and p.m. for times instead of AM and PM (or am and pm). (MOS:TIME)
- "on December 8, 1983, 6:47 pm EST" -> "at 6:47 p.m. EST on December 8, 1983"
- Although the picture of the launch is nice, they are a dime a dozen. I would pref one of the ones of Merbold e.g. File:S09-10-613 - STS-009 - Ulf Merbold on flight deck - DPLA - d53b7f2b160c6ecd73ff8d18ba5c831e.jpg
- All done. I hadn't seen that picture before, nice to have another one of young Merbold. I've moved the crew image to the top. —Kusma (talk) 18:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Ground-based astronaut work
[edit]- "From 1984" -> "in 1984"
- "From 1984, Merbold was involved in the Spacelab D-1 mission, which was funded by West Germany.[1][60] He was the backup payload specialist for the mission, which was numbered STS-61-A as a Space Shuttle flight, carried out on Challenger from October 30 to November 6, 1985.[61][62]" -> "In 1984, Merbold became the backup payload specialist for the Spacelab D-1 mission, which was funded by West Germany. The mission, which was numbered STS-61-A, was carried out on Challenger from October 30 to November 6, 1985."
- Yep, that is better. —Kusma (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Second Space Shuttle mission
[edit]- Why not use a pic of Merbold?
- I already use a picture of Merbold at the time of the mission in the infobox.
Euromir mission
[edit]New paragraph starting at "Merbold launched"
- Done.
Later career
[edit]- "From January 1995, shortly after the Euromir mission, Merbold led the astronaut department" -> "In January 1995, shortly after the Euromir mission, Merbold became the head of the astronaut department"
- Done.
- "He retired on July 30, 2004, but continued to do counselling work for ESA." -> "He retired on July 30, 2004, but continued to do consulting work for ESA."
- Yes, of course. Embarrassing translation error, fixed.
Personal life
[edit]- Suggest renaming section "Private life"
- "Personal life" seems common enough, e.g. in Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin and John Young (astronaut).
- Link commercial pilot license
- Done.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hawkeye7, thank you for the review! I have implemented your suggestions so far. Please let me know if there is anything else, or if you think anything important is missing. —Kusma (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Hawkeye7, anything else? I'm still travelling, but will be able to respond by Thursday at the latest. —Kusma (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Been travelling too, but can pass the article now. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Still a bit awkward in parts; original may have been translated from German
- Apparently I was thinking more in German than usual. I'll have to try to fix this later. —Kusma (talk) 20:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Still a bit awkward in parts; original may have been translated from German
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Although it's not a requirement, I'm not fond of the Google book links, and linking to Worldcat is pointless given OCLC references. I was also disappointed that no use was made of Merbold's book, although it is in German and I haven't read it. I also have a feeling that he may be a celebrity in Germany. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)