Wikipedia:Peer review/Jack King (NASA)/archive1

Jack King (NASA)[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to have any improvements necessary made prior to nominating it for GA.

Thanks, TJRC (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Sounds like an interesting guy, but this article seems much too brief to me to meet the "broad in its coverage" ctrierion for WP:WIAGA. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - Christopher C. Kraft, Jr. is about another non-astronaut NASA person and seems like it would be a great model article here.
The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself but Voice of Apollo and other things are only in the lead. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase
We don't have a date or even year of birth, no mention why he left NASA in 1975 (or even when he left exactly), very little except in the lead on which missions he worked on - this is a start class article and nowhere near ready for GA. There needs to be a lot more detail here.
Look at the refs used and see what is still there - for example ref 7 says he won the Kolcum award, but this is not in the article (seems like it should be). Add what the award is for in a sentence and did a little to find out when he won it and what for and you have some more detail to add. Or what does he say / talk about in the interview that the second picture is taken from? Go back and look at these things more closely and see what else can be gleaned.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]