User:Krjwvq/sandbox

Impact After Retirement
After retiring in 1994, Kranz has continued his lasting legacy in the world of space and flight. In 2000, Kranz published his autobiography titled Failure Is Not An Option, borrowing from the line used in the 1995 Apollo 13 film by actor Ed Harris. The History Channel later used it to adapt a documentary about Mission Control in 2004. Starting in 2017, Kranz helped kickstart and direct the restoration of the Mission Control Room in the Johnson Space Center to the appearance and function of its 1969 use during the Apollo 11 mission. The five million dollar project was intended to be completed for the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission, and for his efforts Kranz was recognized by Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and October 23rd, 2018 was declared "Gene Kranz Day". During the 2018 To the Moon and Beyond luncheon hosted by Space Center Houston, The Gene Kranz Scholarship was started, geared towards funding young students to take part in activities and training for careers in STEM. Ohio State Legislature introduced House Bill 358 to designate August 17th "Gene Kranz Day" in fall of 2019. As of June 2020 the bill has passed the state house and awaits the state senate. Post-retirement Kranz became a flight engineer on a restored Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, flying at air shows throughout the United States for six years. Kranz has also continued to give motivational speeches and talks about his experiences with the space programs throughout the years.

Apollo 13
Further information: Apollo 13

Kranz is perhaps best known for his role as lead flight director (nicknamed "White Flight") during NASA's Apollo 13 manned Moon landing mission. Kranz's team was on duty when part of the Apollo 13 Service Module exploded and they dealt with the initial hours of the unfolding accident. His "White Team", dubbed the "Tiger Team" by the press, set the constraints for the consumption of spacecraft consumables (oxygen, electricity, and water) and controlled the three course-correction burns during the trans-Earth trajectory, as well as the power-up procedures that allowed the astronauts to land safely back on Earth in the command module. He and his team were recommended by NASA Administrator Thomas O. Paine in communications with Richard Nixon to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom for their roles.

Peer Review by K8shep (talk) 18:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
This seems to be the original article material, with no changes made. You may be working in your partner's sandbox, but that's not clear, so I want to make a few notes. When adding, figure out what's missing here--did Kranz and his team get the medal of Freedom? A little more detail on the Apollo 13 work? There are BOOKS and BOOKS about this, so you will find something about what Kranz did and the impact he had. Find a biography of him and work that in. A note--it being 2021, historians of space flight call them crewed missions, not manned missions. While NASA missions were all-male until 1983, I know that this seems interchangeable. But it's not. Let me know what questions you have.

Response to Peer Review
I have been writing down notes as I read his book "Failure is not an option", and I need to get those finally into my sandbox now that I have computer access. I appreciate the pointer in using the gender-neutral terms, as that is something I do not always catch or think about. I will make sure as I am uploading my drafts to take into account the wording I am using.Krjwvq (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Article evaluation for Astrolabe

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything is relevant to the topic. The only distracting part might be the order of contents.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article appears to be written from a neutral point of view. It never tries to present an argument to stand on.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I do not think there are viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The first few citations and reference links worked. Brief look through of sources seem to back up the article.
 * 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?
 * Most facts are referenced with a reliable source, there are some claims that do not have a listed reference immediately following.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * There are several references from within the last 10 years, as well as lots of sources from before 2000.
 * 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?
 * People asked about fact checking certain claims, such as oldest known metal astrolabe.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated C-class, and is a part of the WikiProjects of Astrology, Computing, History of Science, and Astronomy.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It is missing more in depth discussion about common applications, only lists that there are around 1000 applications.