Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mercury Seven/archive1

Mercury Seven

 * Nominator(s):  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

This article is about the Mercury Seven astronauts, who were selected in 1959. As late as 1998, they were the most famous astronauts, but they have been eclipsed in recent years by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin. Still, they include the first American in in space, the first in orbit, the first to fly Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions, and the first to hit a golf ball on the Moon. One even flew on the space shuttle, nearly forty years after being selected as an astronaut. This article was previously nominated as a Featured List, but was not promoted. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  21:19, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Support: I have only trivialities to mention, and none that stop a support at this point: That's it! Easy to read, and very informative and entertaining. A fantastic article! Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:34, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "group of seven astronauts for Project Mercury announced" - reads really strangely. Perhaps "a group of seven pilots selected to crew the Project Mercury space capsules" or something to that effect?
 * Split into two sentences.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "and went on to become a U.S. senator" - I'm not sure this is a detail for the lede, and it splits out the next statement, which definitely is.
 * Removed.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "which carried Laika, a Soviet space dog" - well, really, just a dog. Perhaps "the first of several dogs launched by the Soviets"
 * Special dogs with their own article and TV series! Just calling Laika a dog would create an Easter egg, so leaving it as is.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "the two agencies that should have been supporting it, NACA" - just previous to this it is suggested NACA is already merged. Perhaps some re-arrangement would be useful in this para? Or some additional dates like the formation or funding of MISS?
 * Two things happening concurrently. Swapped the two sentences around.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "desirable brand.[77] The Mercury astronauts" - para break?
 * Split-p.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)
 * "o flew first.[20][83] In August 1959" - maybe here too?
 * Not here; keeps the publicity in one paragraph.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "As additional groups of astronauts" - I think a section break here would be useful
 * Split-p.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "privileges" basis.[85] The Mercury" - para here
 * Spliyt-p  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * split-p  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * "time to it.[88] Training was always" - and here.
 * Split-p  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The article is an unusual one. It was intended as a list, but there was a lot to say about them as a group.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Sources review

 * No spotchecks carried out
 * Links to sources are all working, per the external links checker tool
 * Formats:
 * Carpenter & Stoever 2003: publisher location missing
 * O'Leary 1971: publisher and location missing

Brianboulton (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Quality and reliability: The sources appear comprehensive, and of the standards of quality and reliability required by the FA criteria.
 * Added location and publisher to these references.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Comments by Kees08
Adding this so I do not forget to review.  Kees08  (Talk)   07:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC) The U.S. Astronaut Hall of Fame's inaugural class was the Mercury Seven. I suppose they had an advantage, since the hall of fame was created by the Mercury 7 Foundation. Would be good if we could add whatever we can find on the Mercury 7 foundation, and add in information on the U.S. Astronaut Hall of Fame (the first class, has a lot of Mercury 7 memorabilia, etc). I just added a couple citations to Grissom's article in case you want to copy/paste them in here.  Kees08  (Talk)   07:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It might be a precursor to the Astronaut Scholarship Foundation, I am not sure.  Kees08  (Talk)   07:35, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It is. Added a bit about it.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  10:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Change manned to crewed per GNL policy (when appropriate, obviously)
 * I don't mind "crewed" for Gemini and Apollo (although it sounds a bit crude) but it seems silly when applied to Mercury where there was just one person. Fiddled with the wording to avoid this.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Any way to avoid consecutive 'which's? MISS encountered technical challenges, which caused funding difficulties, which in turn created conflicts with the two agencies that should have been supporting it, NACA and the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA).
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Which came first, the term cosmonaut or astronaut? And is there any reason to insert information into the article about the cosmonaut term?
 * Can't think of any reason, but both were considered when NASA decided on the name astronaut. In the Soviet Union, adopting the American "astronaut" was considered, but in the end they decided to go with "cosmonaut". The latter makes more sense really.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Three-person? A three-man panel
 * It was three men.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Reviewed down to selection process. Still could use something on the US Astronaut Hall of Fame I think. Thanks for the great additions about the foundation.  Kees08  (Talk)   07:02, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe change service records of graduates of test pilot schools to service records of test pilot school graduates
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You could link Marine Corps earlier
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Wasn't the whole selection process secret or top secret? I thought they had to check into a hotel under a pseudonym. Might be misremembering, not sure it is worth inclusion regardless.
 * You're remembering the Next Nine, who checked into the Rice Hotel as "Max Peck". Nobody read my articles.
 * Regarding their welcome, were no Army candidates in that first group?
 * None. My guess is that they did not have the required jet experience. In retrospect, experience with rotor aircraft would have been advantageous flying the lunar module. But to my knowledge, no Army test pilot has ever been chosen as an astronaut.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't think this should be capitalized: to the Space Program
 * Decapitated.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think US spelling is emphasized emphasised
 * Corrected.
 * Hawkeye7  (discuss)  02:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Comments Support by Coffeeandcrumbs
I am going to try hard to find fault where there is likely almost none. These are mostly nitpicking. --- Coffee  and crumbs  23:47, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "USAF agreed to transfer responsibility" is unnecessarily verbose and seems strange (as if they could refuse). Unless you meant "decided", I would change the sentence to "NASA was established on October 1, 1958, and the USAF transferred responsibility for MISS to the new agency." (This also gets around the PROSELINE.) Unless there is some back story I am missing, the USAF obeying orders from the president is not notable as agreeing.
 * There's a lot of back story here, mostly not relevant to this article. For a start, in the United States, the President doesn't have that sort of authority. A lot of negotiation was involved. If you're interested, I recommend   Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think "Glenn and Carpenter did not meet all of their schools' degree requirements" should be followed by a colon or semicolon, follow by a sentence or two, instead of the including the completion of Glenn's senior year which broke my reading.
 * Re-worded.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "and second bachelor's degree" to "and a second bachelor's degree
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "on the eve". Slayton's article says "two months prior to the launch of [ Mercury-Atlas 7 ]". I think the latter is better.
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Slayton's photo seems out of place. Can a portrait from the same period be located? No worries if not.
 * There should have been one in the series with the others, but it isn't on Commons. Maybe can locate one.   Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Found a photo. How does it look?  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:04, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I did a quick restoration and removed the autograph: File:Deke Slayton (c. 1960).jpg. Tell me if you hate the colors. I can try again
 * The one that is being used now is ID # S64-31709, which means it is from 1964. Other options: 1959 (hmm all I am finding now is that one).  Kees08  (Talk)   04:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The idea is to match the others. Otherwise we'd go with the one in the space suit.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  04:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I would crop the photo captioned "The four surviving Mercury 7..."
 * Ref #96 — Says "p. 165" but the chapter link in Warren-Findley (1998) points to page 166 in the source. Remove  from the URL. If you want both pages, you can also remove   and change to "pp. 165-66".
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ref #94 — Source is actually on p. 2 of the "Tempo" section if there is any way to indicate that in your own citation style.
 * I don't think we can.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ref #93 — Change "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" to "NASA" consistent with other refs and consider adding  as seen here, which is the title of the former website (book?). For Shepard, the author's name, Tara Gray, is missing.
 * Corrected.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ref #92 — "About ASF ASF". Only 1 ASF in the title. Also please archive; this source will not stay the same forever.
 * Internet Archive hasn't archived it.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Ref #3 — "p." not "pp."
 * Well spotted.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Carpenter et al. (2010) — Remove "Originally published" to be consistent with style at Cunningham (2009). Or vice versa.
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Compton (1998) — Add  for consistency
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Logsdon & Launius (2008) — Same as Compton — also Eppley (1963) if you like
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not seeing Alt text for File:Mercury Seven astronauts with aircraft.jpg, File:Mercury Seven.jpg, File:LC 14 Memorial Sign 2.jpg, File:LC-14 Mercury 7 (cropped).jpg, and "The four surviving Mercury 7... " photo mentioned above
 * Not required for FAC, but I'll see what I can do...
 * Thanks for your review. Much appreciated.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Coordinator notes
I've added this to the Urgents list in hopes of attracting some additional attention. If not, unfortunately it will need to be archived soon for lack of review. -- Laser brain  (talk)  11:23, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Support by Randy Kryn
I added a See also for the two Mercury program chimpanzees, and updated one fact, but besides that I could find little to criticize in this already fine and important article. With the improvements that have been discussed and worked on in this nomination, featuring this one during the recent and ongoing focus on historical space missions seems appropriate. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:06, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Support Comments by JennyOz

 * "Project Mercury. The name was publicly announced by Glennan on December 17" but then "The STG next had to decide on a name for the people who would fly into space. A brainstorming session was held on December 1, 1958" - not chronological so maybe drop "next"?
 * Dropped.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "aeronaut" - maybe add (air traveller)
 * Done.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "with annual salary of" an? or salaries?
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Robert B. Voas" - add he a psychologist
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "NASA officials then briefed them" - 'briefed the chiefs' seeing para started with candidates
 * The candiates. Clarified.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Edward Givens, who was selected with the fifth group in 1965" - 1966?
 * Well spotted. Corrected.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "John L. Whitehead Jr.,[34] did so only in January 1958" - what is the "only" emphasising? Not yet had the 1500 hrs?
 * Possibly, but I don't have proof. It is more likely that he was in the third group due to having only recently graduated, and therefore not having much test pilot experience. Again, I don't proof. It is highly unlikely that NASA management would have accepted him. In researching the article, I found that an African American graduated in 1958, 1960, 1963, 1972, 1977 and 1984, so only six had graduated in thirty years.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Glenn was at the maximum weight" - weight is not mentioned in the selection criteria list
 * Added a bit. It was not firm like height, because you can always lose weight.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "NASA introduced the astronauts in Washington, DC on April 9" - DC needs comma
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * table - does career column need to be sortable?
 * Probably not. Made unsortable.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Glen flew in space on Mercury-Atlas 6" - double n
 * Doubled.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "becoming the first person fly in space twice" - to
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "co-anchor for the broadcasts of the Apollo Moon landing missions" - full stop
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Mercury-Atlas 10, but it was cancelled" - canceled
 * The auto spelling corrector strikes again.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * slayton's refs [67][49][68][69] - order
 * So ordered.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "Cooper travelled to McGhee" - traveled
 * ... and again.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "private lives, homes, and families.[83][27]" - ref order
 * So ordered.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "on a "rank has it privileges" basis" - its?
 * Well spotted.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "President Kennedy presented" wlink?
 * Linked.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "is buried beneath the monument to be opened in 2464." - needs comma after monument
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * the only info I would suggest adding is maybe a sentence on the wives? Their role in supporting their husbands, NASA's image and each other with their 'club' was rather important. (I'm not suggesting using that link.)
 * There was a TV series too. Reality was more like Mad Men in space. I will add a bit.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:52, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I watched, and very much enjoyed, it. Really made me appreciate them as a vital part of the equation ( even the sham marriage! Cooper? sleeping in the bath ) and of setting the support precedent, all whilst being in the publicity glare. JennyOz (talk) 06:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, JennyOz (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Added.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:14, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that addition. Pleased to sign my support. JennyOz (talk) 06:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Image review

 * The source link for File:Gordon Cooper 2.jpg needs tweaking.
 * The source link for File:Schirra walter 3.jpg is dead.
 * In the source for File:Donald Slayton portrait.png could you give the page number - 13.
 * Two images lack alt text.
 * "Portrait" just barely meets MOS:ALT (although 'Color photograph' may be better); "studio portrait" doesn't. Could there be a brief description please.
 * See Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility/Alternative_text_for_images. A teeny-tiny consensus, but it was discussed at least. Does that change your mind at all?  Kees08  (Talk)   14:47, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * 'Fraid not. It needs to meet the MoS. Just the group photo, (And the two with no alt text.) Gog the Mild (talk) 15:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * How does it not meet the MOS? Adding that it is color or not would not help a visually impaired user understand the function of the photograph. Describing how the astronauts look (if that is what you are suggesting) is not what alt text is for.  Kees08  (Talk)   17:28, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Stick "|alt=a color photograph of four formally dressed elderly men" in and IMO its MoS compliant. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Are we talking about the same thing? I am referring to the images in the table.  Kees08  (Talk)   17:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The images in the table are acceptable with "portrait", although, as I said above, barely; I would have preferred 'Color photograph of John Doe', etc; but, for clarity, I do not feel that this is a requirement for FAC. The alt text for the final group photo needs tweaking; and the two images without alt text need it adding; the first of these you could simply add "|alt=refer to caption", as the existing caption text is explanatory. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 12:40, 23 July 2019 (UTC)


 * There is no consensus that Featured Articles require alt text. See Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Alt text.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:14, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * An FA needs to be fully MoS compliant. The MoS states, under MOS:ACCIM: "Images that are not purely decorative should include an alt attribute that acts as a substitute for the image for blind readers, search-spiders, and other non-visual users. If additional alt text is added, it should be succinct or refer the reader to the caption or adjacent text. See WP:ALT for more information." Gog the Mild (talk) 22:31, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am aware of what it says, and I am aware of what the consensus is regarding its interpretation, which is that featured articles only need comply with the specified items, and not the full MoS, and that the requirement for alt text was discussed at length, and that there was no consensus for its inclusion. If you want to restore the alt text requirement, you need to start another RfC.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  22:42, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * FYI, this is the most recent discussion I could find on the topic as it relates to FAC. It doesn't seem like there's any appetite to require alt text in Featured articles. I won't even attempt to summarize all the various positions people have on the issue, but suffice it to say there is healthy disagreement on whether alt text is always desirable, along with the normal meta discussion about how much of the MoS is open to interpretation. In short, no one should have been demanding it in any of your nominations. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  00:04, 25 July 2019 (UTC)