Wikipedia:Peer review/Shuttle-Mir Program/archive1

Shuttle-Mir Program

Hi there - I have been recently working on this article in an effort to improve it from its pretty much stub-class status, and I would very much like to get it up to FA-class. As such, i'd appreciate any comments as to which sections could be expanded or condensed, a review of the article to finad any errors I have missed, and for the page to be assessed to see whether or not it is yet A-class. Currently i've managed to get it up to Good Article-class, and would like some fresh minds to look it over before I make the final push for featured. Thanks very much in advance. Colds7ream 16:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is really nice work! I'm confused by something, though. There are two source references given for the sentence that starts, "In all, the American astronauts would spend more than a thousand hours aboard Mir." But ... that doesn't look right. Shouldn't it be "more than a thousand days"? (American astronaut Shannon Lucid spent 179 days aboard Mir. 179 * 24 = 4,296 hours.)

Yes, it should - and it looks like someone's corrected that already! Colds7ream

Also, there seems to be quite a bit of Capitalization of Words in the article. For example the phrase, "next leap into Space, to the Moon, Mars and Beyond." But also, repeatedly, "Space Station." Wouldn't "Mir" or just "the station" work as well?

And then, maybe most importantly, as regards the discussion in the "Program background" section about the motiviations for the program: the section doesn't mention the idea that the U.S. participated in the program partly to keep the Mir program (and the larger Russian space program) funded and operated by a relatively friendly Russian government. This is only touched upon in the "Criticisms" section. But it isn't a criticism; it's basic political science. Some people have asserted it was the primary motivation for the program. Of course some assert it continues to be the primary motivation for "Phase 2" as well.... Sdsds 01:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right - thanks for pointing those out. I'll work on some decapitalisation and reworking of the background section when I get back from work this afternoon - thanks very much for reading it through! :-) Colds7ream 07:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decapitalisation done - just got to rework the background section now. Colds7ream 16:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a 'political aims' paragraph to the background - if you think it needs expanding, please keep the comments coming! Colds7ream 18:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello – a cool article there. Several comments:

Introduction: eleven Shuttle flights → eleven shuttle flights
Program Background: Program Background → Background
Program Background: US president → American president
For all sections: For the citations, spaces aren't needed before and after: examples: - in orbit. ^{[1] [2] [3]} → - in orbit.^[1][2][3] and (flying Mir expeditions LD-4 and EO-15). ^{[10] [7] [11]} → (flying Mir expeditions LD-4 and EO-15).^[10][7][11]
Mir: 250 tons, link tons.
Program Timeline: Program Timeline → Timeline

All above done. Colds7ream

Safety & Scientific Return: ageing → aging

What can I say? I'm British, that's how its spelt: Cambridge Dictionaries Online Colds7ream

Forgive my ignorance of British spellings :). Thanks for the link. [sd] 16:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Safety & Scientific Return: Align image to the right.

The reason I aligned it to the left was to continue the left-right-left-right image arrangement of the rest of the article - without wanting to sound rude, why do you think it'd look better on the right? Colds7ream

Ahh... Thanks for the explanation. [sd] 16:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Finances: Reduce the number of one- and two-sentence paragraphs.
Finances: own money is their business,". → own money is their business."
Safety & Scientific Return: Safety & Scientific Return → Safety & scientific return or Safety and scientific return

Good work! Happy editing, [sd] 10:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Above three done - thanks very much for reviewing it; I appreciate the feedback. Colds7ream 16:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Cheers, [sd] 16:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, everyone - thanks very much for the reviews of the article you carried out - I'm putting it forward as a Featured Article Candidate today, and hope that the things you spotted and the changes we made come to fruition in that. Thanks for all the help! Colds7ream 09:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]