Wikipedia:Peer review/Space Shuttle Columbia disaster/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Space Shuttle Columbia disaster[edit]

This has a failed FA, but I think it has improved since then. I would be appropriate if both Shuttle disasters progressed on towards FA. -- TechsMechs 04:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles).
  • 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.
  • Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.
  • 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:MOSNUM, when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.
  • Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.
  • Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.
  • 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).
  • 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]


It's a pretty good article and fairly thorough for the most part. Here's a few (hopefully useful) comments:

  • There are a few more entries that could use a link: thermal protection, external tank, NASA, reentry, O-ring, risk-management, reinforced carbon/carbon, Orbital Maneuvering System, Indian Ocean, telemetry, solid rocket motors
  • I think the following entries need some sort of citation:
    • "Apparently, even the best technical servicing available could not compensate for this fatal design flaw"
    • "Bipod Foam Ramps had fallen off on at least three previous Shuttle flights"
    • "NASA management seemed to grow complacent and accustomed to these phenomena when no serious consequences resulted from these earlier episodes"
    • "Two examples of this were failure to honor engineer requests for imaging to inspect possible damage, and failure to respond to engineer requests about status of astronaut inspection of the left wing"
    • "NASA management did not honor the requests and in some cases intervened to stop DOD from assisting"
  • What is SOFI?
  • I couldn't find any coverage of what safety measures were implemented by NASA prior to the launch of the next mission.

Thank you! — RJH (talk) 14:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]