Talk:Mary Jackson (engineer)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 03:49, 16 January 2017 (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.	Reword this: Jackson is featured in the 2016 film Hidden Figures about three African-American women who worked in a variety of departments at NASA, including calculating flight trajectories, engineering and computer programming, for Project Mercury and Apollo 11 in 1960s. This sounds a little weird (highest level of engineer): After 34 years at NASA, Jackson reached the highest level of engineer that was possible for her without becoming a supervisor. I think demotion might be a more proper term over paycut: She decided to take a pay cut and change positions to become an administrator in the Equal Opportunity Specialist field. Unnecessary comma: She served as both the Federal Women’s Program Manager in the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs, and as the Affirmative Action Program Manager.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	I think the intro can be expanded a tad to include her later career.
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.
	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).	Is legacy.com a reliable source? Same with introductionsnecessary.com? Looks like it is a tertiary source that takes from other sources. Probably best to cite from the originals.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	All copy-vios are stolen from here, not vice versa.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Include an awards section, similar to how the astronaut articles are written.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	She graduated w/ highest honors from her high school. Could add more detail on the type of wind tunnel she was working on; supersonic flow was fairly novel during that time period. Mention that the classes were managed (I assume for?) the University of Virginia. Did she get an additional degree from this? The NASA source I am looking at says more than three decades as a scout leader, not 20 as the article indicates. List as many papers as you can find the titles for in a bibliography section. This source has info on all the positions she held at NASA. It has a lot of good info that should generally be included in the article: https://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/crgis/images/9/96/MaryJackson1.pdf
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.	I'm not sure her Obituary photo that is currently used is a NASA photo. I did not see a NASA ID associated with it anywhere, and just because it is on a NASA website does not mean NASA owns the copyright. Here are two photos where they do own the copyright you could replace it with: https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/mary-jackson-at-nasa-langley-1 https://www.nasa.gov/content/mary-jackson-biography These might already be in the Commons, and there may be other good photos out there, this was just a cursory Google search.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	On hold in the event you add both photos and caption the one.
	7. Overall assessment.

Noting that I've addressed the issues in part 1 and 2. I believe Legacy.com is acceptable, as it is simply rehosting content from the Daily Press I have not been able to find the original content (archived or otherwise), but based on my searches of this domain on Wikipedia and elsewhere I have no reason to believe they're not rehosting the original content. As for introductionsnecessary, I've removed the references to that site and replaced them. I'll address parts 3–6 tomorrow. GorillaWarfare (talk) 07:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

@Kees08: Okay, I've gone through the rest! Regarding whether she earned an additional degree from her night courses, I haven't seen any sources indicating that she did. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:26, 16 January 2017 (UTC)