Wikipedia:Peer review/Space Shuttle Challenger disaster/archive1

Space Shuttle Challenger disaster edit

There are only several FA's on the space program and this is one of the few that has a decent shot at becoming one. I became aware of this page while persuing a featured picture nomination and did some minor work on it. It has undergone some SERIOUS revisions over the last two months, so I figure it's time for some outside feedback. Palm_Dogg 03:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks alright, and I agree with you that the article has a decent shot at becoming Featured, but there are several issues that need to be addressed. For starters, the mission table and the picture of Challenger’s disintegration should be switched so that the table is on top and the image below. Also, consider listing the crew and the mission control staff at the bottom of the page, rather than the top. If this is not possible then consider expanding the "Mission personnel and objectives" section so that it reads like entry and not like a list. The following images have no source information, or no link to their source information:

Lastly, consider placing more inline citations in the article if it is at all possible. TomStar81 03:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Space Shuttle Challenger disaster edit

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.
The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.
There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City. (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.
Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.
Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL.
Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. For example,
- apparently
- might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please ~~strike~~ this comment).
Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 9 additive terms, a bit too much.
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “~~All~~ pigs are pink, so we thought of ~~a number of~~ ways to turn them green.”
- Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am ~~now~~ using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
You may wish to convert your form of references to the cite.php footnote system that WP:WIAFA 2(c) highly recommends.
As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas.

This script was run by -- TechsMechs 19:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]