Wikipedia:Featured article review/Christopher C. Kraft Jr./archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 8:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC).

Christopher C. Kraft Jr.

 * Notified: MLilburne, WikiProject Spaceflight, WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Virginia, Pritzker Military Library WikiProject, 2021-12-21

I am nominating this featured article for review because much of the prose is cited to the subject's autobiography and those citations should be replaced with secondary sources. There is also inconsistent citation formating, short paragraphs and some uncited statements. Z1720 (talk) 15:50, 22 January 2022 (UTC)


 * It is perfectly acceptable to use the subject's autobiography and there is no need to replace it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:04, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think better phrasing of my thoughts above are that if there is a high-quality secondary source that verifies similar information, it should replace an inline citation to Kraft's biography. If Kraft is the only source that can be used for the information, then it should not be replaced. I am concerned that 38 of 88 inline citations in the article are to Kraft's autobiography, including some opinionated statements like, "Not much happened in Gemini or Apollo that didn't either originate with us or with our input." (which is according to Kraft) and "Both astronauts and mission controllers had made the right decisions," (which could be rephrased to "he thought that the astronauts and mission controllers had made the right decisions"). I searched Kraft's name in WP:LIBRARY and found lots of sources about Kraft, particularly sources written around the time of his death in 2019. There are also articles on the Apollo missions that are FAs that might contain high-quality sources that mention Kraft. The concerns primary sources do not negate that there are uncited statements and short paragraphs throughout the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:53, 31 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Quite so. I'll have a look at the article and add required references and fix up the short paragraphs. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  05:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)


 * I have done a pass through the article and removed bare URLs, added citations for everything is cited, tidied up the references, consolidated short paragraphs, and added some additional sources. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  23:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * - Would you be able to give this a re-review and see what you think about the state of the article now? Hog Farm Talk 14:24, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Z1720 mentioned elsewhere that real life is keeping them off of Wikipedia. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:51, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I will try to give this a review at some point over the next few days, then. Hog Farm Talk 04:42, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

HF 


 * "He also discovered that wingtip vortices, and not prop-wash, are responsible for most of the wake turbulence in the air that trails flying aircraft. This finding was forgotten and later rediscovered independently" - it may be best for independent sourcing on this
 * Added an independent source, and the original paper, which is still available from multiple sources, and still frequently cited. I doubt his assertion that it was forgotten; it has been cited in many aircrash investigations, the earliest one I found being in 1957, and the so-called "rediscovery" cites it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "A pivotal experience for Kraft was the flight of Mercury-Atlas 5," - source is the Time piece itself; needs a better source for this part
 * Re-sourced. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "and responsibility for some of the others is still being debated" - need a better source than Carpenter's letter
 * Added another source. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "but under the circumstances there was little he could do" - a non-Kraft source for this?
 * Re-wrote this to make it clearer that Kraft was in Houston.
 * "Called into Mission Control by Gene Kranz almost immediately after the accident" - sentence fragment
 * Added a bit. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

- Any thoughts? I'm comfortable with most of what is being sourced to Kraft, but I think there are definitely a few places where a non-Kraft source would be best. Hog Farm Talk 06:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * - Thank you! I'd say I'm probably comfortable with this one being kept if you are. Hog Farm Talk 21:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Not ready to let this one through yet (1a and 1d concerns). I had to make too many prose adjustments, and since my prose is not stellar, that means we need a real prose guru to go through. I'm also not convinced we have given due attention to the Kraft Report or worked in scholarly research. The original nominator has not edited the article since 2007, while journal publications about the effect of the Kraft Report on subsequent disasters continued, and without incorporating that, the article isn't neutral. Our content on the Kraft Report is unchanged from the version that passed FAC in 2007, so a fresh look at the newer scholarly sources might be in order. We should discuss whether all the praise in the lead is balanced by whatever ends up at Christopher C. Kraft Jr. about the Kraft Report. It seems like significant controversy. At minimum, we can mention the "controversial" Kraft Report in the lead. Hopefully by the time someone addresses that, Z1720 will be back and can look at the prose; I found a lot of redundancy on only a quick look. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  03:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * this sentence isn't working: "The panel's controversial report, known as the Kraft report, recommended that NASA's Space Shuttle operations should be outsourced to a private contractor, and that NASA cut back on the organizational changes intended to improve that were made after the Space Shuttle Challenger accident." Can it be split in two after private contractor, and I can't tell what the second part is aiming for. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  09:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Split it and reworked it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:10, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * From Organizational Learning at NASA : The Challenger and Columbia Accidents: "McAfee (2006) especially champions joint-authoring tools such as blogs and wikis because "the intranet platform shifts from being the creation of a few to being the constantly updated interlinked work of many". He cites the experience of Wikipedia to suggest that such forums can offer highly reliable information."


 * Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:10, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The lead is much better now (can't figure out why McAfee 2006 is quoted above though). Sandy Georgia (Talk)  20:01, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Z1720 

I am returning to semi-active editing, so I'm giving this article another look-through. Overall, I think this article is very close to a keep. I made some edits; please review them to ensure that they are appropriate for the article. The images need alt text per MOS:ALT. The infobox mentions the ASME medal and the Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership, but these are not cited in the article body. Likewise, I think there are some awards in the awards section that could go in the infobox. Once these concerns are addressed I'll take another look. Z1720 (talk) 19:56, 23 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I have added those awards to the body. MOS:ALT conformance is not required at FAC. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  00:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * MOS:ALT is an explanatory supplement to a guideline. The specific guideline that requires this is MOS:ACCIM #1. The featured article criteria #2 says featured articles should follow style guidelines, wikilinking to the manual of style, of which MOS:ACCESS (and the ACCIM subsection) are part of. This is also something that has been required of FACs for a while, so I assume that it is required for all featured articles. Z1720 (talk) 23:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Alt text has never been required of FACs. Nor has strict MOS conformance. Only those parts of the MOS specifically mentioned are required. MOS:ALT is only an explanatory supplement. It is not part of MOS:ACCESS.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  03:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You are both a little bit right and a little bit wrong. Alt-text and accessibility are part of MOS, and all of MOS is part of the criteria. There was a long period when alt text was most certainly enforced at FAC, but that was when we had multiple editors (no longer with us) who were very well versed in how to write alt text and willing to do it for those of us who weren't.  WP:WIAFA clearly states, as it always has, that articles must comply with WP:MOS (not just some parts of MOS, although it highlights three parts with the words including).  And alt text is mentioned twice at MOS.  But no part of MOS has ever been strictly enforced at FAC, and alt-text enforcement has fallen out of favor simply because ... most of us don't know how to write alt text correctly, and there are few editors who can do it.  While it may not be a reason to hold up a FAC or FAR, it is surely something we can do out of thoughtfulness for readers who need it.  Worse than the lack of alt text is the way almost NONE of the maps in ANY articles at FAC or FAR comply with MOS:COLOR (note the new images we added during the Great Fire of London FAR to bring it in to compliance) ... we can only ask and hope that editors will be considerate of visually impaired readers, although enforcement of this part of MOS at both FAC and FAR is spotty.  Certainly, articles are passing both FAC and FAR today with maps in breach of MOS:COLOR, as an example.  Alt text falls into the same category. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  05:06, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I won't fail to support an article's featured status only on alt text, but if some kind soul, who appreciates all the work some of our editors who use screenreaders do in here, should add alt text, it would be most appreciated. If I knew how to write alt text, I'd do it myself; I would never present an article at FAC without alt text. Meanwhile, the prose is still spotty. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  05:17, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's an art form. I have added ALT text. The worst part of MOS:ACCESS in my opinion is the requirements it imposes on tables. Instead of adjusting the table table template, it imposes complex CSS markup requirements that most editors cannot perform. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree it's no fun to try to comply with ACCESS, and am so happy when someone else does it for me! But I hold the work up in appreciation for all that  (who uses a screenreader) does in here, and try to do what I can (which may not be much!). Thanks for doing that, Hawkeye7. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  19:53, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the ALT text, and for SG for clarifying the very muddy waters of MOS:ALT. I've taken some time away from this article to hopefully bring a fresh perspective to it. I made some copyediting changes, which I encourage others to review and change if desired. My only concern is with the following sentence: "Kraft commented in his autobiography that, with the choice of his name, "some of my life's direction was settled from the start"." I think this is referring to Kraft sharing a name with Christopher Columbus but I'm just guessing here. Can this quote be briefly explained in the article? Thanks. Z1720 (talk) 17:29, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Hawkeye7  (discuss)  20:44, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The book says: "My father considered his name onerous; it had forced him to survive teasing as a boy and the occasional jibe as an adult. But in that glowing moment, it hit my mother just right. I was only minutes old and now the burden was mine, too. Can a name influence the course of a life? I've had most of a century to ponder that question. I think with a name like Christopher Columbus Kraft Jr. some of my life's direction was settled from the start."


 * I'm not sure how to incorporate the above quote into the article, so I'll drop this concern unless someone suggests wording. I'm ready to declare keep with the understanding that as more secondary sources become available, the article will try to reduce the number of citations to Kraft's autobiography, where appropriate. Z1720 (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

 Ceoil 

Watching from a prose pov, its doable; repetitive and tacked on here and there but now (from the work above) not fatal. Have made trivial edits, and can give another run through tomorrow night. Am leaning keep. Ceoil (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ps, obv using autobiographies as sources (per discussion above) should be avoided like the plague. Ceoil (talk) 05:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm leaning keep, although I don't have much familiarity with the source material. Hog Farm Talk 03:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Why are we told this (is there some later relevance)? "His father died on New Year's Day in 1957, aged 64." Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * My inclination is that that can be removed, but I'll wait to hear from Hawkeye in case they're aware of some relevance. Hog Farm Talk 17:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Some people like to add (birth-death) to the subject's parents, and when it gets queried or rewritten we get something like that. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Checking on this recent edit, I see that award is mentioned elsewhere in the article and could be all covered in the Awards and honors section. And from viewing just the Awards and honors section, it is apparent the article has not yet been copyedited. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  15:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, my concerns are satisfied; . Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I'm at keep as well. Hog Farm Talk 02:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 18:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.