User talk:Englishkid2/sandbox

Revision Plans for Gravity(Film) (The following contains: Bullet Point suggestions, Summary for revision process, and citations.)

- Focus on the film's scientific accuracy...can you compare previous NASA space missions to the one in the film?

- Focus on why the article meets Wikipedia standards of b±eing a good article.

- explain how people dont focus on the article itself, but the actual film. is that a problem?

-Dont drift away from the assignment

- apollo space missions, how do they compare to the film?

-is it good to have people re-enact real life events?

Summary:

I am happy to have found a topic in which I am interested in. However, it has been difficult for me to review the article single-handed based on Wikipedia's "good article status." Film's are credited as we know for being scientifically relevant to events and people in present-day reality, or for proposing themes such as love, hate, mystery, and crime. This has made me believe that I chose a relatively difficult topic to review, but that's okay. The reason why I chose the film Gravity is because the storyline creates controversy. For film's that propose questions about reality and controversy- an opportunity is deemed by users to not only post information about the film/actors/production, etc, but also to discuss themes present in the movie. Drifting away from that note, the article itself meets the standards to being a good article. There are little to none spelling errors, and information is almost spot-on with the right dates, people, and nomination facts. But that may be the overall problem of this article...is it too much factual based? Are people necessarily not focused on the article itself but rather the movie? In order to improve not only the article but the revisions to the essay, I will focus on how the film can compare to previous NASA space missions. Propose a series of questions- is the film scientifically accurate? Is it necessary to create films that re-enact fiction or real catastrophic events?

Citation: All Information credited to authors. Find facts about NASA space missions.

ibtimes.com "NASA Discusses 'Gravity,' The Dangers Of Space And Life Aboard The ISS" by Charles Poladian

rottentomatoes.com

Possible books from the COD library...still looking for a few.

nasa.gov

Possible books from the Roselle Public Library Englishkid2 (talk) 23:54, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Topics for Revising Gravity article
What was challenging? For film's that propose questions about reality and controversy- an opportunity is deemed by users to not only post information about the film/actors/production, etc, but also to discuss themes present in the movie. Drifting away from that note, the article itself meets the standards to being a good article. There are little to none spelling errors, and information is almost spot-on with the right dates, people, and nomination facts. But that may be the overall problem of this article...is it too much factual based? Are people necessarily not focused on the article itself but rather the movie? In order to improve not only the article but the revisions to the essay, I will focus on how the film can compare to previous NASA space missions. Possible Topics for Article Gravity (Film):

Imdb.com

Factual Errors/ Scientific Accuracy -Stars do not twinkle in the realms of space. If you are located on the earth’s surface, you might witness the twinkling of stars because of the earth’s atmosphere. -When Kowalski and Stone are stuck between cords in a spacecraft, Kowalski orders to be let go of and is then sent through space, floating away with decreasing oxygen levels. This is incorrect because both are in the same orbit, so a small tug would have worked to pull Kowalski toward safety. - When Dr. Stone gets back into the spacecraft, she initially takes off her spacesuit. Two parts are missing: Liquid Cooling & Ventilation Garment. In the film, Stone goes through an extreme amount of stress and excitement, leaving her to be awfully sweaty underneath her spacesuit. However, as she takes it off, there are no signs of sweat, which does not make sense.

Credit goes to Imdb critic users and rotten tomatoes****

Rotten Tomatoes.com 9/10 Englishkid2 (talk) 15:06, 23 March 2015 (UTC)