User:Bh7pb/sandbox

Working on History of Spaceflight with Zach Bible on his sandbox. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zhbgy5/sandbox

Article Evaluation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_measurement


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There is barely any mention of Asian cultures and their measurement systems. It's mostly concentrated on the ancient Middle East and Europe.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The only citation is a statement that all the information in the article is from the National Institute of Standards and Technology. There is one link to a publication from 2002, but it just takes you to the main page for the NIST. There are also no in-text citations.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * The source is neutral, but seems to be only a modern source and there isn't anything that specifically talks about the past. The linked source also does not include the mentioned publication.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * That it might be a good idea to merge the article into the Metrology article as History of Metrology. Also seems that the article is missing parts that used to be there.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-class in Measurement.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-class in Measurement.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

China
Since 1956 the Chinese have had a space program which was aided early on from 1957-1960 by the Soviets. They were provided missile technology experts and missiles to study from. In 1965 plans were made to launch a human into space by 1979, and in 1967 the plans were made for a 4-human spacecraft. "East is Red" was launched on April 24th, 1970 and was the first satellite to be launched by the Chinese. In 1974 the plan for human spaceflight was scrapped when policy makers decided that applications satellites were more important and competing with the USA and USSR wasn't as important. In late 1986, the 863 Project was started which had a focus on military applications, but also had a goal for human spaceflight.

Despite possessing less funding than ESA or NASA, the People's Republic of China has achieved manned space flight and operates a commercial satellite launch service. There are plans for a Chinese space station and a program to send unmanned probes to Mars.

China's first attempt at a manned spacecraft, Shuguang, was abandoned after years of development, but on October 15, 2003, China became the third nation to develop an indigenous human spaceflight capability when Yang Liwei entered orbit aboard Shenzhou 5.

The US Pentagon released a report in 2006, detailing concerns about China's growing presence in space, including its capability for military action. In 2007 China tested a ballistic missile designed to destroy satellites in orbit, which was followed by a US demonstration of a similar capability in 2008.

Peer Review by Rtvw9 (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
The article is neutral and goes straight to the point; it does not overwhelm the reader with too many details. I enjoyed reading about the background information about China and the USSR, and I was a little curious on the details why the USSR provided space aid to China. If possible, you could link to other wiki pages for more information regarding that relationship. I also noticed how the date was written as 4/24/1970, and I think it'd be better to write it out like April 24, 1970. Other than that, I think this is pretty good and I look forward to future changes.

I'm currently looking for a source about the USSR and China's relationship at the beginning of their space program and once I find one, I'll add more information about the relationship. I changed the date to be easier to read as well. Bh7pb (talk) 16:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Compliments
1. The article revisions do a good job in giving important background information that was previously absent.

Critiques/Things to add
1. The first source used, albeit a good source of historical information, sort of seemed to put China in the limelight by using phrases like “50 splendid years” and “eye-catching achievements”. I would try see if you can find sources written by non-Chinese entities to get a rounded perspective.

2. I would consider deleting “China stands poised… power” because it doesn’t add any new information and begins to sound a little biased.

3. I would write out the date 4/24/1970 as April 24, 1970.

4. There is still a lot of unsourced information.

5. Regarding your section about military action in space: you could look into the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 (of which China is a part). It details and restricts the use of weapons in space. However, you have to be unbiased and can’t make China seem like the bad guy.

6. You could link to the “East is Red” article: Dong Fang Hong I. Also, you should specify that the East is Red “was the first satellite to be launched by the Chinese” because the wording right now makes it seem like it was the first “4-human spacecraft”.

I'm working on finding additional sources for this subject and am keeping the bias in mind for the source I do have. I removed the phrase you suggested and changed the date and added the word "satellite" to add clarity. I've been working on the first paragraph of the section and have been using the one source for it. The other paragraphs are from the original article and I hadn't taken a look into critically editing them, but am going to now as the military action part is important. Bh7pb (talk) 16:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Plan as of April 4, 2018
Working with my partner we agreed that we should focus on reformatting the NASA entry into a list of programs with paragraphs about each program and work on transferring the Russia programs over as well. The information I added to the China section will stay and might be added to, but it's less important to add to the article.