Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/NASA Astronaut Group 2/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 25 September 2021 [1].
NASA Astronaut Group 2[edit]
This article is about the Next Nine, the nine astronauts selected for Projects Gemini and Apollo in 1962. They were the next most famous group after the Mercury Seven, although few astronauts are much remembered today. They are also widely regarded as the best group ever chosen. Six of the nine flew to the Moon (Lovell and Young twice), and Armstrong, Conrad and Young walked on it as well. Seven of the nine were awarded the Congressional Space Medal of Honor (one posthumously). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments by ProcrastinatingReader[edit]
Fascinating article! Some comments; take them with a grain of salt, as I don't usually review FAs. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Lead
- I think it's worth introducing what this group was being "selected" for more clearly in the lead. More generally, I think the "Background" section (which is pretty
clearly worded) could be more clearly summarised in the lead.
- Original Seven is used without being introduced. Per Mercury Seven this seems to be another name for them, but this is not obvious as worded in the lead. I'd go further and say it's worth just sticking to the same name in the lead.
- with the announcement of the Gemini program leading to the Apollo program; neither are introduced? I guess a reader can click the articles to make sense of what's being said, but I think the relevant portions of the events should be summarised.
Selection process
- Neil Armstrong submitted his application a week after the deadline, but Walter C. Williams, the associate director of the Space Task Group, wanted the NASA test pilot, ... I read around the relevant pages of the source; is the choice of phrasing in the bolded part trying to emphasise the whole 'have at least one civilian' idea? If so, worth making that more clear. Or is there another reason it's distinctive?
- recommended by employer -> "were recommended by their employer"?
Group members table
- Any reason some terms are dupe linked and others not? eg Armstrong and Borman's rows both link "Bachelor of Science", but Lovell's doesn't.
- Linked. Normally only the first occurance is linked, but with lists they can appear in any order. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Similar in the "Elliot M. See, Jr" row ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- Moved this link up above, so now unlinked in each of the bios. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:25, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- Linked. Normally only the first occurance is linked, but with lists they can appear in any order. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Link "USAF Experimental Test Pilot School" to U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School
Training
- The deals with Field and Time Life earned each of the nine $16,250 (equivalent to $139,000 in 2020) per annum over the next four years I'm guessing Time-Life was then the same entity as the Life magazine used in the preceding sentences? If so, worth using the same name perhaps, or at least clarifying the relationship in prose if this was a totally separate/unrelated deal.
General
- Shouldn't there be consistency in the usage of "New Nine and the Next Nine"? eg: Lead has them in that order, infobox uses the first ("New Nine"), the "Group members" table uses "Next Nine", the "Training" section introduces them the opposite way to the lead.
Alternative ideas for lead[edit]
NASA Astronaut Group 2, also known as the Next Nine and the New Nine, were astronauts selected by the United States space agency NASA in 1962: Neil Armstrong, Frank Borman, Pete Conrad, Jim Lovell, James McDivitt, Elliot See, Tom Stafford, Ed White and John Young. The group included the first civilians, but like the original Mercury Seven astronauts were all white men. Six of the nine flew to the Moon (Lovell and Young twice); and Armstrong, Conrad and Young walked on it.
The next nine augmented the Mercury Seven, who had all been military test pilots and selected to accomplish only the simpler task of orbiting the Earth in Mercury spacecraft. President John F. Kennedy had announced Project Apollo, on May 25, 1961, with the ambitious goal to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade. More astronauts were required to fly the two-man Gemini spacecraft and three-man Apollo spacecraft then under development. Whilst test pilot experience was still mandatory, the new challenges of space rendezvous and lunar landing led to the selection of four who also had advanced engineering degrees. The next nine were announced on September 17, 1962. Lovell and Conrad had been candidates for the Mercury Seven. The two civilian test pilots selected were See, who had flown for General Electric, and Armstrong, who had flown the X-15 research plane for NASA. All of the nine went on to illustrious careers as astronauts, and seven were awarded the Congressional Space Medal of Honor.
- (Additional comment)
Additionally, if you liked these comments, please add a comment or 2 here Chidgk1 (talk) 12:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt[edit]
- As a formatting suggestion, the block quote from Grissom might do better as a quote box, since it would sop up the white space left as you recount the selection criteria.
- " more capacious" suggest "roomier"
- " but the mission was aborted after Armstrong used some of his re-entry control fuel to remove a dangerous roll caused by a stuck thruster" I might change "used" to "was compelled to use".
- "commander of Apollo 12" vs. "Commander of Apollo 10" inconsistent.
- "as well as the first member of his Naval Academy class to pin on the first, second, and third stars of a general officer." Did others get their stars as admirals before him? Or were generals in the Marines? Can we refer to flag rank if not?
- The words are those of the source. I'm pretty sure that he was, but do not have a source for it. Stafford retired as a three star in 1979, and the only member of the class to reach four-star rank was Ace Lyons, who was not promoted to vice admiral until 1981. The only vice admiral I know of in the class was William H. Rowden, but there may have been more. Stafford was not the only astronaut in the class; there was also Jim Lovell. One thing I did discover was that of the 783 graduates in the class, 53 died during service. One marine died in ground combat in Korea, six Navy and USAF aviators were killed in action in Vietnam, and one died in an accident on the submarine USS Pomodon. The other 45 died in air crashes. Statistically that's still better than being one of the Next Nine but still pretty appalling. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
- Support All looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Neopeius[edit]
I got your message and I'm happy, as always, to lend a hand! Thank you for taking on this article. I'd seen it was at FAC, but I hadn't noted the author. :)
- May I suggest the following rearrangement of the lead? Right now, it sort of tails off, and related information is scattered between the two paragraphs. (note -- I have neither added nor revised text, merely moved around. It should be easy to implement.)
NASA Astronaut Group 2, also known as the Next Nine and the New Nine, was the second group of astronauts selected by NASA. The group was selected to augment the Mercury Seven. President John F. Kennedy had announced Project Apollo, on May 25, 1961, with the ambitious goal of putting a man on the Moon by the end of the decade, and more astronauts were required to fly the two-man Gemini spacecraft and three-man Apollo spacecraft then under development. The Mercury Seven had been selected to accomplish the simpler task of orbital flight, but the new challenges of space rendezvous and lunar landing led to the selection of candidates with advanced engineering degrees (for four of the nine) in addition to test pilot experience. Their selection was announced on September 17, 1962.
The nine astronauts were Neil Armstrong, Frank Borman, Pete Conrad, Jim Lovell, James McDivitt, Elliot See, Tom Stafford, Ed White and John Young. Lovell and Conrad had been candidates for the Mercury Seven, but had not been selected then. Although test pilot experience was still mandatory, the Next Nine were the first group that included civilian test pilots: See had flown for General Electric, and Armstrong had flown the X-15 research plane for NASA. Like the Mercury Seven who had been selected before them, all were married white men with children, and all but one were Protestant. Six of the nine flew to the Moon (Lovell and Young twice), and Armstrong, Conrad and Young walked on it as well. Seven of the nine were awarded the Congressional Space Medal of Honor.
Background
- "By 1961, although it was yet to launch a person into space, the STG was confident that Project Mercury had overcome its initial setbacks, and the United States had overtaken the Soviet Union as the most advanced nation in space technology. "
Selection Criteria
- "were experienced test pilots, with 1,500 hours test pilot flying time, who had graduated from a military test pilot school, or had test pilot experience with NASA or the aircraft industry;
- "At this time Jerrie Cobb was pressing for women to be allowed to become astronauts, "
- " NASA Administrator James E. Webb told the media that "I do not think we shall be anxious to put a woman or any other person of particular race or creed into orbit just for the purpose of putting them there."[15]"
- Based on the cited source, and to add context, I would say, "NASA Administrator James E. Webb conceded this in a statement to the press in spring 1962, adding "I do not think we shall be anxious to put a woman or any other person of particular race or creed into orbit just for the purpose of putting them there."[15]"
- Very well. Unfortunately, the reader doesn't really get the full context here. There are more details in the articles on subsequent groups.
- Based on the cited source, and to add context, I would say, "NASA Administrator James E. Webb conceded this in a statement to the press in spring 1962, adding "I do not think we shall be anxious to put a woman or any other person of particular race or creed into orbit just for the purpose of putting them there."[15]"
Selection Process
- "the U.S. Air Force (USAF) conducted its own internal selection process, and only submitted the names of eleven candidates."
- The Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Curtis LeMay
- I always get dinged when I put two links together. I know there's an MOS page on that.
- MOS:SEAOFBLUE: When possible, avoid placing links next to each other so that they look like a single link, but it recognises that it is hard to avoid sometimes. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:39, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- I always get dinged when I put two links together. I know there's an MOS page on that.
- "The Air Force's pre-selection process seems to have been successful; nine of the eleven were chosen as finalists, and one of those rejected, Joe Engle, was selected in a later intake in 1966."
- This is only notable if the Army and Navy had a lower rate of candidates advancing to the finalist stage. Do you have numbers?
- I only have the total number of candidates, 253, which includes civilians. Of the 32 finalists, 13 were USN, 4 were USMC, 9 were USAF and 6 were civilians. It is therefore certain that the Navy and Marine Corps had a much lower rate of candidates advancing to the finalist stage, but more overall, which is as ypou would expect. It's notable though either way, as it shows an important difference in selection between the services.
- This is only notable if the Army and Navy had a lower rate of candidates advancing to the finalist stage. Do you have numbers?
- "Lovell was not selected for the Mercury Seven due to a high bilirubin blood count.[23]"
- "As with those who had been passed over in the Mercury Seven selection, most of the rejected finalists went on to have distinguished careers. William E. Ramsey became a vice admiral in the Navy, and Kenneth Weir, a major general in the Marine Corps.[22] Four would become NASA astronauts in later selections: Alan Bean, Michael Collins and Richard Gordon in 1963, and Jack Swigert in 1966.[31]"
- There were 32 finalists. Only 6 have careers noted here. What were the careers of the other 26 like?
Demographics
- "The nine astronauts were Neil Armstrong, Frank Borman, Pete Conrad, Jim Lovell, James McDivitt, Elliot See, Tom Stafford, Ed White and John Young."
I'll have more, but for now, I have to hit the beach. :) --Neopeius (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for being so quick on the ball, @Hawkeye7:! Moving forward:
Neil Armstrong
- I think I'd link X-15 -- I know it's linked in the lead, but this is far away.
- "to remove a dangerous roll caused by a stuck thruster"
- "During training for his second and last spaceflight as commander of Apollo 11"
- "became the first people to land on the Moon, and spent two and a half hours outside the spacecraft. "
- "He earned a Master of Science degree in aerospace engineering from the University of Southern California in 1970."
Frank Borman
- "He was initially selected for Gemini 5 with Gus Grissom, but Grissom was moved to Gemini 3, with Young as his pilot."
- "On this mission he and Lovell spent two weeks in space, and performed the first space rendezvous with Gemini 6A."
- "He retired from NASA and the USAF in 1970, and joined Eastern Airlines, eventually becoming its Chairman of the Board in December 1976, eventually retiring in 1986."
- "After the Apollo 1 fire he was the astronaut representative on the accident investigation board."
- "After the Apollo 1 fire, the January 1967 launch pad test incident that killed astronauts Grissom, White, and Roger Chaffee, Borman was the astronaut representative on the accident investigation board.
Conrad
- "He set an eight-day space endurance record along with his command pilot Gordon Cooper on his first spaceflight, the Gemini 5 mission in August 1965."
Lovell
- "Lovell graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland with the Class of 1952, and became a naval aviator. "
- "In 1958, he graduated from the United States Naval Test Pilot School with Class 20. He flew as the pilot of the Gemini 7 mission in December 1965 during which he and Borman spent two weeks in space, and conducted the first rendezvous in space, with Gemini 6A."
- "In April 1970 he became the first person to fly in space four times, and the first to travel to the Moon twice, on the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission."
McDivitt
- "McDivitt joined the USAF in 1951, and flew 145 combat missions in the Korean War. "
- "He commanded the Gemini 4 mission during which White performed the first U.S. spacewalk. "
- comma after mission.
- " In February 1972 he was promoted to the rank of brigadier general, the first astronaut to reach that rank. "
- ", and became a senior vice president at Rockwell International. "
See
- " See graduated from the United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) in 1949 with a Bachelor of Science degree in marine engineering, and a commission in the United States Naval Reserve. "
Stafford
- " Stafford graduated with a Bachelor of Science from the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland with the Class of 1952, and joined the USAF."
- " as well as the first member of his Naval Academy class to pin on the first, second, and third stars of a general officer. "
- That's cute phrasing, but I think it's a bit too colloquial. Is this meant to indicate he was the first member of his Naval Academy class to make Vice Admiral?
White
- "In June 1965, he flew on Gemini 4 as its pilot, and conducted the first American spacewalk. "
Young
- "He joined the Navy, and set world time-to-climb records for 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) and 25,000 metres (82,000 ft). "
- "He returned to the Moon as commander of Apollo 16 in April 1972, making the fifth crewed lunar landing. He became the ninth person to walk on the Moon, and the second to fly to it twice"
- "In April 1981, he commanded the STS-1 mission, the maiden flight of Columbia."
Next time, you'll definitely want to do a sweep for commas before dependent clauses. :)
Off to dinner. Back to finish things off, hopefully tonight. --Neopeius (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Training
- "organized an Astronauts' Wives Club,[54] along the lines of the Officers' Wives Clubs that were a feature of military bases."
- "A lawyer, Henry Batten, agreed to negotiate a deal for their personal stories with Field Enterprises along the lines of the Life magazine deal enjoyed by the Mercury Seven, for no fee."
- "but Mercury Seven astronaut John Glenn intervened, and personally raised the matter with Kennedy, who approved the deal."
- "The deals with Field and Time-Life (which owned Life magazine) earned each of the nine $16,250"
- "Armstrong was responsible for trainers and simulators; Borman for boosters; Conrad for cockpit layout and systems integration; Lovell for recovery systems; McDivitt for guidance systems; See for electrical systems and mission planning; Stafford for communications systems; White for flight control systems; and Young for environmental control systems and space suits.[63]"
Legacy
- " he did not want a shortage of astronauts to be the reason the schedule could not be met, and therefore proposed that there be another round of recruiting.[66]"
Pictures
- The first Background and Selection criteria photo captions are missing final periods.
That's it for copyedits. I have not checked the sources. Many are offline, so that may be a little tricky. I can check the ones I have, though. Not tonight, but perhaps Thursday. If someone else beats me to it, that's fine, too.
@Hawkeye7: --Neopeius (talk) 00:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Neopeius, how's this one looking? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support by Balon Greyjoy[edit]
Glad to review this Hawkeye7! Currently on hotel WiFi for the next few days; please forgive any delays in responses
- I would reduce the discussion of the Mercury Seven. While their role is obviously important as the group that was selected prior to the Next Nine, I think that linking to their page is enough.
- I strongly disagree. The amount of Mercury Seven discussion is limited, contextual, and in my opinion, necessary. Articles should stand alone where possible. My cent and a half. :) --Neopeius (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- My thought it that the establishment of NASA and the Sputnik launch are outside the scope of the second class of astronauts. All of this was done by the time that the second class was selected. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- I really like the succinct history of the Space Race to date there. I did something similar with Mariner 1. --Neopeius (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Respectfully, I disagree with adding extra backstory for the Space Race, but it doesn't change my decision to support the FAC. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- I really like the succinct history of the Space Race to date there. I did something similar with Mariner 1. --Neopeius (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- My thought it that the establishment of NASA and the Sputnik launch are outside the scope of the second class of astronauts. All of this was done by the time that the second class was selected. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 10:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. The amount of Mercury Seven discussion is limited, contextual, and in my opinion, necessary. Articles should stand alone where possible. My cent and a half. :) --Neopeius (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- "The two-person Mercury II spacecraft concept did not die" It's not really clear why this is pointed out, as there's no previous mention in the article that the 2-crew Mercury capsule was on the chopping block
- "Perhaps the most important change was lowering the age limit from 40 to 35." Is the "most important" part from the sources (I can't find it in the Grissom article, don't have "Deke!" on me, and don't have "The Real Stuff")? That seems like a subjective claim to deem one change more important than the others.
- "submitted the names of all their pilots who met the selection criteria" This makes it seem like it was ALL USMC/USN pilots who met the selection criteria; I'm assuming it was still only the pilots who applied?
- How many USMC/USN applicants were there? There's no good comparison for when it says that the Air Force only submitted 11 names.
- "The candidates called it a "charm school"." I don't think this sentence is necessary, as it's already clear what the school is teaching.
- "to a more manageable 32 finalists" I would remove "more manageable" since it is clear that the number of finalists are from a larger pool of applicants.
- "later intake" Why not just say that Engle was selected in Group 5?
- I would remove the name of Birdwell for not being selected, as none of the other non-selects get a specific mention on why they weren't selected
- "Their average age was 32.5" I would round this to 33. I'm not sure what date is being used to determine selection, but using September 17, 1962, I found the average age to be 33.1.
- At the time of selection. Made this explicit. The source says 32.5 and the Mercury Seven were 34.5. It appears that they took their age in years and averaged that. With the aid of computers, I too came up with a more exact figure of 33.1, which is accurate to the day. Although we could argue that it's not OR; WP:CALC: Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. I'm reluctant to substitute our figure for the one in the sources. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- I disagree, and think that using "33" is more appropriate. As only whole years were used to determine the 32.5 average, the result has more significant figures than the data that went in. This makes it seem like the average was 32 years\ 180 days, when the calculations would consider someone 32 years 1 day and 32 years 364 days as the same age. Not a dealbreaker as far as supporting this FAC, but I think it makes it seem like the average is more exact than it actually is. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- At the time of selection. Made this explicit. The source says 32.5 and the Mercury Seven were 34.5. It appears that they took their age in years and averaged that. With the aid of computers, I too came up with a more exact figure of 33.1, which is accurate to the day. Although we could argue that it's not OR; WP:CALC: Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. I'm reluctant to substitute our figure for the one in the sources. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- "The nine were deficient in only one respect: there were too few of them." I would remove this. It's not the class's fault there were only nine astronauts. Additionally, it comes across as romanticizing/subjective to say they only had one flaw in the entire class; they were obviously all high caliber individuals, but they still made mistakes and bad decisions.
All I have for now! Article is in good shape! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 11:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Made some comments above, but I support this nomination. Nice work! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 18:18, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Support by Nick-D[edit]
For disclosure Hawkeye approached me on my talk page to ask that I review here. I have no intention on going easy on the article though!
- I also posted a request for reviewers at WP:SPACEFLIGHT. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- The first sentence of the lead should include the date the astronauts were selected/annouced
- What's the context for the Gus Grissom quote in the selection criteria section? He's not identified as being involved in the selection process.
- "At this time, Jerrie Cobb was pressing for women to be allowed to become astronauts" - please say who she was
- "and the Mercury 13 had passed the same medical tests" - please also explain who the Mercury 13 were
- " Paul Bikle, the director of the NASA's Flight Research Center, declined to recommend Armstrong" - I think a bit more context is needed here (e.g. was Bikle part of the selection panel, or a potential referee at the start of the process?)
- "and Armstrong and See were civilians" - I'd suggest noting that they had both previously served in the military
- The bio for Armstrong should note he was the first to step foot on the moon (well known, of course, but it looks funny to not see it)
- The bio for Lovell should note that he commanded Apollo 13
- There are eleven people in the photo of the Next Nine during desert training - can the other two be identified?
- The 'Legacy' section notes the views of other astronauts on this group, but can the views of historians also be noted? From memory, the book A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts notes criticisms from scientists that the Apollo astronauts had too narrow a skillset due to the pilot-related requirements, but I'm not sure it applied at this stage of recruitment for the Apollo project. Nick-D (talk) 11:22, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Putting the Mercury Seven in charge of the astronauts was definitely putting the astronauts in charge of the asylum, but NASA was an organisation of pilots and engineers, so they fitted in well there. Scientists would remain outsiders for many years. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, they have. I had noted this in the article on Group 4, where it came to the fore. It wasn't an issue at the time of the Next Nine selection like the admission of women was, but I have added a couple of sentences about it with respect to their training. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Support My comments above are now addressed - nice work. Nick-D (talk) 22:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Comments Support by Pendright[edit]
Lead:
- NASA Astronaut Group 2, also known as the Next Nine and the New Nine, was the second group of astronauts selected by NASA.
- Suggest spelling out the second NASA - regardless of the link
- MOS:ABBREVIATIONS: Acronyms in this table do not need to be written out in full upon first use, except in their own articles or where not doing so would cause ambiguity. The list includes NASA. But okay. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- President John F. Kennedy had announced Project Apollo, on May 25, 1961, with the ambitious goal of putting a man on the Moon by the end of the decade, and more astronauts were required to fly the two-man Gemini spacecraft and three-man Apollo spacecraft then under development.
Background:
- In response to the Sputnik crisis, the President of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, created a new civilian agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), to oversee an American space program.[2]
- The U.S. Congress enacted the legislation that created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). National Aeronautics and Space Act
- The Space Task Group (STG) at the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia created an American crewed spaceflight project called Project Mercury.[3][4]
- Need a comma after Virginia
- The two-person Mercury II spacecraft concept did not die; the STG head Robert R. Gilruth formally announced it on December 7, 1961, and on January 3, 1962 it was officially named Project Gemini.[9]
Selection:
- Civilian test pilots were now eligible, but the requirement for experience in high-performance jets favoured those with recent experience, and fighter pilots over those with multi-engine experience such as Scott Carpenter of the Mercury Seven.
- favoured - sp?
Training:
- Other than the first two sentences of the first pragraph, the first two pragraphs of this section are, for the most part, incidental to the accepted meaning of the word training. So if training is the intended subject of this section, then Consider swapping the first two paragraphs with the last two paragraphs - and weaving into the text at some point the dates when the training began and ended
- Most bought lots and built houses in Nassau Bay, a new development to the east of the MSC.[54]
- Jungle survival training was conducted at the USAF Tropic Survival School at Albrook Air Force Station in Panama, desert survival training at Stead Air Force Base in Nevada, and water survival training on the Dilbert Dunker at the USN school at the Naval Air Station Pensacola in Florida and on Galveston Bay.[63]
- Could you embellish a bit by showing how the survival training took place?
- Following the precedent set by the Mercury Seven, each of the Next Nine was assigned a special area in which to develop expertise that could be shared with the others, and to provide astronaut input [for[
todesigners and engineers.[55] Armstrong was responsible for trainers and simulators, Borman for boosters, Conrad for cockpit layout and systems integration, Lovell for recovery systems, McDivitt for guidance systems, See for electrical systems and mission planning, Stafford for communications systems, White for flight control systems, and Young for environmental control systems and space suits.- Could this be enhanced a bit by describing how or in what way or manner it took place?
Finished - Pendright (talk) 17:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Supporting - Pendright (talk) 13:57, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Source review — Pass[edit]
Notes
- #6 — NASA could be linked.
- #14 — Ditto.
- #15 — Retrieval date not needed for printed matter.
- #34 — Time could be linked.
- #36 — Not sure the title is correct. Is this The Advocate? If so, it can be linked. Retrieval date not needed for printed matter.
- #39 — Retrieval date not needed for printed matter.
- #48 — BBC could be linked.
- #50 — United States Naval Academy could be linked.
- #62 — NASA could be linked. Retrieval date not needed for printed matter.
- #65 — NASA could be linked. Retrieval date not needed for printed matter.
- #71 — National Air and Space Museum could be linked.
- #72 — NASA could be linked.
- #74 — NASA could be linked.
- #76 — Space.com could be linked.
References
- For works with multiple authors, suggest the "| name-list-style = amp" parameter
- Praeger could probably be linked Praeger.
- University of Nebraska Press could take a link.
- Ditto Simon & Schuster.
- And Pocket Books.
- Grand Central Publishing, too.
- Also Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. And is the second comma included in the version you used? The Wikipedia article on the publishing house doesn't include it.
- Hacker & Grimwood 2010, and Morse & Bays 1973, don't need the retrieval date.
This version looked at. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the source review.
- For consistency, the publishers are not linked.
- The
|name-list-style=ampparameter doesn't do anything, because an ampersand is already inserted by the template- This is true in the Notes section, but not in the References section. Look at the first three books there as examples. Atkinson & Shafritz 1985, for instance, displays as "Atkinson, Joseph D.; Shafritz, Jay M. (1985)" rather than as "Atkinson, Joseph D. & Shafritz, Jay M. (1985)". It would display as the latter with the template.
- Comma removed from Farrer, Straus and Giroux
- Removed the retrieval dates from the books. Kept for the newspapers, because we may need the Wayback machine in the future.
- The Catholic Advocate is not the The Advocate; the title is correct: it is the name of the newspaper of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark.
- The title of The Catholic Advocate article is correct. Added the subtitle.
- Perhaps the title changed at some point, but page 1 of the newspaper terms it The Advocate, not The Catholic Advocate. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Linked Time
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hawkeye7, minor comments above. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Article changed to address these. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Looks good. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- Article changed to address these. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Image review - pass[edit]
File:Astronaut Group 2 - S62-6759.jpg - checks out
File:JFK at Rice University.jpg - both source links are dead for me
File:Astronaut Groups 1 and 2 - S63-01419.jpg - checks out
File:Astronaut Neil A. Armstrong (1964).jpg - checks out
File:Frank Borman NASA Portrait (S64-31455).jpg - checks out
File:Conrad-c.jpg - both source links are dead for me
File:Jim Lovell official 1964 portrait.jpg - checks out
File:James A. McDivitt portrait.jpg - source link is dead for me
File:Elliot See - S64-29933.jpg - checks out
File:Thomas Stafford.jpg - all three source links appear to be nonfunctional
File:Edward H. White II portrait.jpg - source link is giving me an xml error
File:John Young in a business suit.jpg - checks out
File:Next Nine Desert Survival Training.jpg - checks out
File:President Reagan Presents Medals - GPN-2000-001679.jpg - source links are dead
The images all appear to be properly licensed as PD via creation by US gov't, although several of them don't have functioning source links, which should be corrected if possible. Hog Farm Talk 04:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Repaired File:JFK at Rice University.jpg,
- Recovered File:Conrad-c.jpg, File:James A. McDivitt portrait.jpg, File:Thomas Stafford.jpg, File:Edward H. White II portrait.jpg , File:President Reagan Presents Medals - GPN-2000-001679.jpg from Wayback archive.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:15, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 00:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.