Talk:Mercury Seven

Unsigned

who is clayton g casella?

Citation banner

I have rmoved the citation banner as being grudging and inappropriate. There are some things we know.--Brunnian (talk) 22:07, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

"Heroes" heading

Changed heading "Heroes" to "NASA Introduction." The title did not reflect the section content. The section is about NASA's introducing the 7 astronauts to the media. It is not about heroism. 67.172.16.149 (talk) 16:32, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Bachelor's degrees

We should add a summary of the seven's educational qualifications. I just discovered an interesting fact about two of them: despite the requirement of a "bachelor's degree or equivalent", two of them, Glenn and Carpenter, did not technically meet all the requirements of their schools, and therefore did not actually receive their degrees until 1962 after each had made his Mercury flight. Shepard actually exceeded the requirement, having earned a Master's degree in 1957. JustinTime55 (talk) 21:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Pre-review checklist

@Hawkeye7 and Balon Greyjoy: (and whoever else is interested) - I am starting a list of improvements that should be done to this article prior to GA. With it being the lead article in the topic, it would be nice if we could take it to featured.

• Revise the captions, some too long
• Verify image licensing
• Write about Mercury 7 Memorial (and any related types of memorials)
• Add additional awards/honors as necessary
• A bit more about their educational background, per your point above, perhaps with more demographic information.
• Create a background section
• Maybe some sort of cultural impact section, or at least a section related to the 'hero' status, the 'do no wrong' the astronauts had (that was later revealed to be not-so-true.

  Also their impact on later selections and missions

  I guess we probably need to say a bit more about The Right Stff

• Failed candidates of the 1959 selection process.

Just starting a preliminary list. My cat is telling me to go to bed now, so I will try to expand on it. Kees08 (Talk) 06:58, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm going to overhaul it soon, with the intention of making it a Featured List. I'd like to merge the Group Members and Status after Mercury into a table with their ranks and other details and a thumbnail of each. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good. I think it could be a featured article someday, but either way is a fine path. Kees08 (Talk) 06:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mercury Seven/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Balon Greyjoy (talk · contribs) 07:13, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

I was holding off on reviewing this article to see if anyone else would, as I have reviewed 4 of your articles in the past 5 months. But there have been no takers to review your article, and I know how much of a pain it is to wait a prolonged time for a review.

The article seems in pretty good shape. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 07:13, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Comments

• I would remove the last two sentences of the caption of the infobox photo, or add the details in as a note. The caption is really long, and it's not significant that two of the astronauts were wearing spray painted boots, or that it was the only time they were photographed together in pressure suits, as it's not like there would be any reason for them to be outside of a publicity photo.

  Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• Can you elaborate on what "three doses of castor oil" means? Were they taking it just to take it, or was it producing some result?

  Castor oil is commonly used as a laxative. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:54, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  Learn something new every day! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• I change "next intake" and "fifth intake," as the word intake isn't commonly used to describe an astronaut group. I would just state what astronaut group/year they were selected.

  Changed to "group" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• I would remove the hair color and eye color, as that's not an attribute that is particularly homogenous among them, and not relevant to their success as astronauts.

  Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:54, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• Did Schirra and Glenn particularly struggle to make weight while working as astronauts, or did they just have to watch their weight/health? The former seems significant, and worth elaborating on if there are details, while the latter doesn't seem significant, they were just heavier men.

  They had to keep their weight down. A heavier astronaut meant the custom-made space suits and form-fitting couches might not fit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:54, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  Sorry if I was unclear. I understand that they had to keep their weight down, but my question is if Schirra and Glenn routinely struggled with it (they routinely had to cut weight in a hurry for weigh-ins, flights), or it was just a one-time issue for them to make weight.Balon Greyjoy (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  It was a continual battle, especially for Schirra. "Both had to watch their weight carefully while they were in the space program." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• I would rewrite the sentence about "mature, middle-class Americans, average in height and visage, family men all," ready for single combat versus worldwide Communism", as it starts out making it sound like they were viewed as civilians, but the end of the sentence takes a strong military tone. Also, is the "single combat" line a quote from somewhere? If not, it comes across as editorialized.

  Removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• I would remove some of the explanation behind the jobs assigned to the Mercury astronauts, as stating that Grissom had a mechanical engineering background is as applicable as Cooper and Slayton having engineering backgrounds. Also, the test pilots were all exposed to different types of aircraft, so I don't think its relevant to use that as a reason for Glenn designing the cockpit. In summary, I think the paragraph should just state what systems/components each astronaut was involved in, and leave out the rationale for it.

  The rationale is given in the sources, and by the astronauts themselves. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• As much as I like the Gene Kranz quote, it doesn't seem to fit in the paragraph, as it is mostly about them getting cars, and then the last sentence transitions to a discussion about their appearance. Also, it seems hyperbolic; while I'm sure astronauts had a "look" about them, there were only 7 of them, so its not like one would be seeing them all over the place.

  The numbers increased with further selections in 1962, 1963 and 1966. The point here is that the Mercury Seven set the tone. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:23, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

• Quite a few points to bring up for one of the last paragraphs:

  Can you elaborate on how the office had a military character, as the sentence talks about how they don't wear uniforms, but doesn't explain the otherwise military aspects of it.

  Added a bit. Hawkeye7 (discuss)

  How did Shepard implement a "rank has its priveledge" system?

  He was in charge. Added a couple of examples. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  Nice job with this.

  "Training classes were always ungraded" Can you elaborate on this, as I'm sure they were graded in some way when preparing for missions/checking out new systems.

  No, never. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  In the same sentence, can you go into how the Mercury astronauts had much to lose?

  I thought it was obvious, but I've spelt it out. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  For what type of events was attendance voluntary? I'm sue there were optional training events, but its not like the astronauts could duck out of training for an upcoming flight.

  Only if they wanted to. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

  I fleshed out this sentence to slightly.

• The Awards and honors section seems short; were there no other big awards that they won as a group?

  Added a bit about the memorial at LC-14. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Changes I made

• "Use of military test pilots would not only simplify the selection process, it would also satisfy security requirements" to "Accepting only military test pilots would simplify the selection process, and would also satisfy security requirements" to make it clear that they were the only applicants that NASA was accepting, and then I changed a few words to make the sentence flow better (not using "only" twice)
• I added "candidates" to "Several declined at this point" to make it clear who the subject is in the sentence
• I changes "15 Navy, 15 Air Force, and two marines" to "15 from the Navy, 15 from the Air Force and two from the Marine Corps." to make it consistent. Alternatively, it could be "15 sailors, 15 airmen, and two Marines"
• I changed "the reporters "lustily applauded them."" to "were applauded by reporters" as its not particularly significant they the astronauts would be applauded, and doesn't need a quote to get the point across
• I rewrote the first sentence in the paragraph about the rejected Mercury Seven, as the first sentence makes it sound like they had accomplished a lot before their application (which is probably true), but the rest of the paragraph talks about their later careers.
• I removed "which was unsurprising" when talking about women selection, as that's unecessary since you go on to explain why all candidates were white and male
• I changed "He reached the rank of lieutenant colonel in the USAF" to "At the time of his death, he was a lieutenant colonel in the USAF" to indicate that he hadn't previously reached the rank and separated from the military.
• I changed "roughhoused and drank and drove fast and got into sexual peccadilloes" to "some of the men also drank heavily and partied," as the fact didn't seem significant enough, or from a recognizable figure, to necessitate a quote. Also, the next sentence covers their affairs, so I don't think it needs to be in the first sentence
• I added "of management decisions" to the sentence about Mercury Astronauts remaining in control

@Hawkeye7: I am done with my initial review; nice work on the article. I hope that you don't mind, but I tried to take more initiative on making small edits in the article instead of suggesting them to you. I got the idea from looking at some of Kee08's reviews. I tried to break up my edits into as many small edits as I could to make it easier if you would like to revert some of them. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 08:18, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

That's fine. (It's actually encouraged at GA.) I have addressed all your points. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:38, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: Nice work with this article; happy to pass it! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 00:07, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Featured topic

It can be a featured topic with 7 people of Mercury Seven and this page. 14.232.160.139 (talk) 09:32, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

• Good idea and already in motion! Although technically a good topic until two more get promoted to featured status. Kees08 (Talk) 19:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Military Ranks and Positions

For the clueless who still haven't figured it out - military ranks and positions are CAPITALIZED. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.9.121.18 (talk) 19:02, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

See MOS:MILTERMS. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

this rule is incorrect and was obviously written by someone not familiar with the military, not to mention the fact that as an Australian you are clearly not familiar with the rules about U.S. military ranks; you do not capitalize a rank part of the time, it is an OFFICIAL TITLE that is always capitalized. Furthermore, the majority of wiki articles have all ranks capitalized as they should be so selectively enforcing rules is inappropriate and rather laughable. Once again the wiki editors demonstrate their lack of knowledge and unique ability to make up whatever rules suit them.

Wikipedia style guide: Military ranks follow the same capitalization guidelines as given under § Titles of people, below. For example, Brigadier General John Smith, but John Smith was a brigadier general.

US Army style guide: Capitalize military titles preceding a personal name. Lowercase military titles when standing alone or when following a name. (p. I-16) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

They're all capitalised. I'm going to fix that in a few days if no one objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.231.67.253 (talk) 20:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)