Talk:Mars Society/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 23:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Jumping in to start this review. I will be leaving comments in the table below. I should get round to adding comments tomorrow. Looking forward to getting started! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 23:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Lead Very minor point (feel free to ignore): First sentence could be reordered to be a bit clearer, as such: The Mars Society is a nonprofit organization, founded in 1998 by Robert Zubrin, that advocates for human Mars exploration and colonization. Change lobby to lobbying. Maybe change named to called in both instances in the lead. Background and founding In 1981, the first public conference for Mars exploration was organized and named Case for Mars, by students at the University of Colorado in Boulder. Was the conference named Case for Mars by the students, or was it organised by the students? If the latter, I'd suggest rearranging the sentence to make that clearer. Two years later at the next Mars launch window, two launch vehicles, one carrying crew and habitat, and the other carrying another factory and Earth-return vehicle for the next mission. This sentence doesn't make sense. between $250 to $500 billion Change to between $250 and $500 billion. and those written to Zubrin Change to and those who had written to Zubrin. Mars analog habitats The first paragraph mentions the MDRS: In December that year, the MDRS's construction in Hanksville, Utah was completed. However, it is first defined properly in the second paragraph: The money was to be used on the next Mars analog habitat, called the Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS). I think some re-ordering is needed. From 2001 to 2005 Mars mission simulations at FMARS are usually 2–8 weeks long by ten rotated crews, in batch of 6–7 people. This sentence doesn't make sense. The first four-month-long mock mission was done in early 2007, revealing collaboration issues between the crews. I don't think this quite makes sense. Maybe change to "which revealed collaboration issues between the crews"? Even better if you could specify a bit about what those were. Design Both stations originally have the same basic design Should this be Both stations originally had the same basic design? Many equipment were broken Possibly should be Many pieces of equipment were broken.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead Section is quite short. More detail could be added about how/why it was founded, and definitely more about the MDRS and FMARS. Layout I think the general layout of the prose is a bit confusing. For instance, in the History section, there is a subsection dedicated to the Mars analog habitats. However, further down there is a whole separate section on the Mars Analog Research Station Program. These sections, in my opinion, should be combined—possibly the best way of doing this would be to combine the Mars analog habitats subsection into the main Mars Analog Research Station Program section. Then, some of the current detail in the current Mars analog habitats subsection might be better placed in a "History" subsection of Mars Analog Research Station Program. Hope that makes sense. Words to watch None identified. Fiction N/A List incorporation N/A
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources are neatly presented in the appropriate places.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Source check Häuplik-Meusburger, Sandra; Bishop, Sheryl; O’Leary, Beth (2021) The first four-month-long mock mission was done in early 2007, revealing collaboration issues between the crews. The source states that the four-month-long mission took place in the summer of 2007—not early 2007? Except for the pod, the modules are connected via tunnels. The source seems to state that all buildings are connected by tunnels except the robotic observatory, not the pod. Cusack, Stacy L. (1 January 2010) In December that year, the MDRS's construction in Hanksville, Utah Tiny point, but the source states the MDRS was constructed near Hanskville, not in Hanksville. Also see point in 1a above about moving this sentence. S. F. Portree, David (March 2000) Y Portree, David S. F. (15 April 2013) Two years later at the next Mars launch window, two launch vehicles, one carrying crew and habitat, and the other carrying another factory and Earth-return vehicle for the next mission. Struggling to find this detail in the source. Hogan, Thor (May 2007) one-twentieth of the Mars plan in NASA's Space Exploration Initiative. Is the SEI the same as the "space agency plan" mentioned in the source? Blakeslee, Sandra (18 August 1998) with four thousand mails and emails sent to Zubrin by readers. The source states "more than" (and "mails" is a bit confusing of a word), so I'd suggest changing to "over four thousand letters and emails". On 13 August 1998 I might be missing something, but I can't see that 13 August is mentioned in the source as the founding date. Conroy, J Oliver (17 February 2022) Y Bishop, Sheryl L. (2011) The first Mars analog facility of the Mars Society is the Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station (FMARS) on the Devon Island. Maybe change to "The first Mars analog facility to be sponsored by the Mars Society", as I think that's more accurate? Hall, James (8 March 2002) Y Mars Society (23 August 2001) Y "About the Mars Society". Mars Society Y Foust, Jeff (26 February 2015) Y Goodyear, Dana (19 October 2009) Y "Steering Committee – 2022". Mars Society Y Wall, Mike (22 September 2016) Y CBC News. 6 June 2011 Y Rayome, Alison DeNisco (3 March 2020) Y Vargas-Cuentas, Natalia I.; Roman-Gonzalez, Avid (June 2017) The MARS Oz is also in the planning phase by the Australian Mars Society The source is from 2017 - is the MARS Oz still in the planning phase?
	2c. it contains no original research.	From source checks, I am content there has been no OR.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	My main observations regarding this criteria are that there are examples of sentences in the article which are close to the wording used in the source. All food and supplies are at the habitat or being supplied by the crew, and there is no resupplying while a mission is in progress. Because there are very few spare parts on-site, crews must be able to repair broken equipment themselves. These sentences are quite close copies of what is in the source, so I'd suggest rewording. It was first occupied in July and August 2000 This is a direct copy of what's written in the source, so I'd suggest rewording. Perhaps something like "During July and August 2000, the first people arrived and worked at the facility." As of April 2020, the MDRS has hosted nineteen Mars mission simulations, totaling 236 crews in 6–7 people batches in missions lasting from 1–2 weeks. Another very closely-copied sentence from the source. Would suggest changing. A ladder connects both floors together. This sentence stands out as being almost directly copied from the source. I think the section can be easily reworded to avoid this, for example: "The lower desk has more but smaller rooms, and the doors in the FMARS are square and tall. The upper deck is connected to the lower deck by a ladder. It has a shared space which is used for both computing and dining. The galley consists of a stove, microwave, and a water container. The galley's and ladder's position are swapped compared to the MDRS, as well as the toilet and bathroom." Except for the pod, the modules are connected via tunnels. At the habitat, the lower deck is used for science and engineering activities. Like the FMARS, it has a shower and toilet, a biology and geology laboratory, two simulated airlocks, an extravehicular activity preparation area, and storage space. The upper deck is used for social activities, dining and communications, and has seven separate crew quarters. In the loft area, a tank stores freshwater and a hatch is used for maintaining antenna and weather instruments. Water for flushing the toilet is provided by the greenhouse, and electricity is provided by batteries under the habitat. When comparing this section of the article against the source, there are quite a few instances of very close wording. I also don't think there necessarily needs to be information as detailed as how the toilet is flushed. I suggest changing to reflect the information in the source but not as directly, maybe something like: On the lower deck of the MDRS, there are hygiene facilities for crew members as well as spaces dedicated to laboratory work and storage. The upper deck contains areas for eating, socialising and sleeping. The MDRS also has a loft which stores technical equipment.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	To help assess this criteria, I have looked at the Mars Society website to get a sense of their main activities and history. This article covers: History of studies of human missions to Mars. Why the society was founded. Its main activities, with most of the focus on FMARS and MDRS. It could include the following key details (with suggested sources): Background and founding Information about the Founding Declaration of the Mars Society. I think Blakeslee 1998 covers this. Structure and activities Something about how it is a non-profit with volunteers. Maybe the Mars Society website would be appropriate as a starter? More on the VR and University Rover Challenge. I know the latter has its own article but I feel like the info in this article could be expanded. When did these projects start? The Mars Society has chapters all over the world. This feels like important information to include in the section dedicated to how the organisation is structured. You don't have to list every single chapter, but highlighting a few would be good. There is a list on pp.251-252 of this book: On To Mars! By Vladimir Pletser, 2017, Springer (accessible via Google Books). Were there any notable conferences?
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	In general, the article focusses disproportionately on the FMARS and MDRS. I see both have their own articles, which you have nominated for deletion. I think the deletion discussions for those pages are outside of the scope of this review, but the amount of information included in the Mars Society article about the two projects suggests they are notable enough for their own articles. To state the obvious, the Mars Society article should be focussed on the society. Currently, the section devoted to that information (Structure and activities) is very short. I'm not too familiar with how to handle scope issues like this, so will just gives the heads up now that I might have to ask for a second opinion from someone more knowledgeable. There are some places in the article where there is unnecessarily detailed information: Second paragraph of Background and founding is unnecessary. It is about the Mars Direct plan, not the Mars Society. In mid-2001, the Mars Society received a $5000 check from Elon Musk for a fundraiser event. Zubrin took notice and invited Musk for coffee. There, he talked about the Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station and the Translife Mission which included experiments where a spinning capsule would subject mice to Martian gravity. This could be cut out and I think the prose would still make sense, and make it more focussed. Musk had shared a plenary talk with Michael D. Griffin at the fourth Mars Society convention where he announced his plans to send a greenhouse to Mars. He left the Mars Society shortly after and by April 2002, Musk abandoned the project and founded SpaceX, inviting aerospace engineers that he had met beforehand. I don't see how this is related to Research and engagement. The second paragraph of this section seems like it is about operations, and therefore should be included in the Operations subsection. Unfortunately that makes the Research and engagement activities section empty.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is presented neutrally.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Recent edits are mostly be nominator and are constructive.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images have appropriate copyright status.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are appropriate and have suitable captions. Not part of the GA criteria, but second-last image requires an alt description.
	7. Overall assessment.	Both the nominator and reviewer have agreed to fail this GAN for now. This is primarily due to issues with the focus and scope of the article (criteria 3). See comments in those sections of the table. How to improve the article Some suggestions following the review, alongside those in the table above: Assess whether the articles for FMARS and MDRS need to be deleted, or if they could be brought up to standard using many of the sources from the Mars Society article. If the articles are not deleted, they can be linked to from the Mars Society article and content about those projects can be slimmed down. This will greatly improve the focus of the Mars Society article. Reordering the article might help with its focus. There are multiple sections and subsections on FMARS and MDRS currently, when they should really be contained within one or two sections. More on the actual structure, purpose and organisation of the society. Hope this helps, but as mentioned below, I'm very happy to take more questions!

Replies by the nominator

I write my replies here to avoid cluttering the table. Forgive me if I had complicated the GA reviewing process. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

• 1a: Done, with some adjustments to the recommendations for the lead and the Mars analog habitats section. The "collaboration issues" in the source are quote "Results from this first attempt [...] revealed a number of issues (e.g., multicultural conflicts, coping inefficiencies) that underscored the need for longer studies situated in real environments that pose true isolation and risk.", and I paraphrased that on Wikipedia as "which revealed cultural conflicts and inadequate coping strategies".
• 1b: I expanded to lead to talk about how MDRS and FMARS operates in general and splited the "Mars analog habitats" section to be "Construction of Mars analog habitats" and "Research and engagement activities" for clarity. I don't really want to combine both of the sections because I want to expand on other aspects of the Mars Society's activities.
• 2b:
  • "The first four-month-long mock mission was done in early 2007, revealing collaboration issues between the crews" Removed "early"
  • "Except for the pod, the modules are connected via tunnels" fixed
  • "In December that year, the MDRS's construction in Hanksville, Utah" fixed
  • "Two years later at the next Mars launch window, two launch vehicles, one carrying crew and habitat, and the other carrying another factory and Earth-return vehicle for the next mission" The details is in "In January 1999, NASA would launch two more Ares rockets. One payload would be identical to the 1996 propellant..." in the source, which I subtracted January 1999 by December 1996 to get roughly 2 years. If you want, I can provide an additional source for that.
  • "one-twentieth of the Mars plan in NASA's Space Exploration Initiative" yes, that's what the text is referring to, as the whole source is talking about SEI
  • "with four thousand mails and emails sent to Zubrin by readers" fixed
  • "On 13 August 1998" Well, this is complicated. The source is written in Aug. 18, 1998 and says "And, last week, ... the founding convention of the Mars Society" and "four-day event -- it ended Sunday". By deduction, that is 13 August 1998. This is a pretty roundabout way to get the date because there is literally no other source that says the full date (not even the Mars Society itself) but I'm more than happy to chop the days if you want to.
  • "The first Mars analog facility of the Mars Society is the Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station..." Yes, the Mars Society built and owned the station. Rephrased a bit to make it more clear.
  • "The MARS Oz is also in the planning phase by the Australian Mars Society" seems so as I found a source in October 2022, though the plan is not named "Mars Oz" anymore.

User:Unexpectedlydian, may you put the review on hold or even fail the review outright? Based on your comments at 3a and 3b, I think that I need a lot more time than what GAN allows in order for me to build up the article's content. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @CactiStaccingCrane, thank you for responding to my comments so quickly. I think that's a sensible request. I will complete all parts of the review first, then I think I will have to fail it based on criteria 3. If you're planning to add further content into the article, that's great and please do! However, I agree that it requires more time than the GA process usually allows for. If you have any questions at all please do get in touch :) Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 15:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)