Talk:Ulf Merbold/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

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

 * 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

 * 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

 * 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

 * 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

 * "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

 * 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
New paragraph starting at "Merbold launched"
 * Done.

Later career

 * "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
Hawkeye7  (discuss)  23:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 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, 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


 * 1) 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)
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) 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&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * 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)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * 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)
 * 1) Overall:
 * 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)
 * 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)