Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anna Lee Fisher/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 22 December 2022 [1].

Anna Lee Fisher

edit
Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk) and Balon Greyjoy (talk)

This article is about Anna Fisher, one of the first six women selected to be astronauts by NASA in 1978. During her long and distinguished career at NASA, she was involved with the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station and the Orion spacecraft. This article is the fifth in the series about the first six women astronauts, following Sally Ride, Judith Resnik, Kathryn Sullivan and Rhea Seddon. Unlike those astronauts, Fisher has no biography, so its writing was more difficult. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Harry

edit

Not sure why this doesn't seem to be attracting much attention. Let's fix that.

—There are other places the prose could be tightened but the FA criteria don't demand perfection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:50, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back Harry. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I

edit

Thank you for your invitation to participate. Two things immediately come to my mind: (1) The sentence "Anna was interviewed by Connie Chung, and that night Bill took Anna and Resnik, who had also been selected, out to dinner to celebrate". Now "Connie Chung" links to a journalist, but that article doesn't mention any position ever held at NASA. Is this the same Connie Chung? If yes, NASA needs to be mentioned, if no, then a disambiguation link like Connie Chung (NASA) might be necessary. (2) Anna Lee Fisher's mother was born in Hof, Bavaria, Germany, and grew up in Munich; also Anna Lee Fisher is fluent in German. (My source is that I met a German autograph collector at a fair once who showed me a personalised autograph he had obtained from Dr Fisher as a child which was accompanied by a short letter from her in German). Might or might not be useful in the article.ViennaUK (talk) 13:25, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments II

edit

Just a comment, not a full review, but I'm concerned that the 'iconic photo' section and its associated notes feels to me like OR. What secondary sources describe it as 'iconic'? FN 67 seems to only cite that the image was posted on ffffound, not any of the other preceding content. Why are these selected uses of the image encyclopedically relevant? Note three feels like speculation, particularly the sentence "It is possible Bryson photographed Fisher on multiple occasions, but that has yet to verified." How do we know that the blogspot post is accurate and was actually posted by Bryson's son? Why are Bryson's speculations posted on social media encyclopedically relevant in Note 4? What cites that " The only publicly available archive of Bryson's work is at The Briscoe Center for American History at The University of Texas."? What cites that " became massively popular on the internet"? Etc. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A note that my concerns have been addressed through Mike Christie's source review below, thanks. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt

edit
That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Wehwalt. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support from SusunW

edit

I had intended to review another woman before the end of the year, but real life issues got in the way. I don't usually work on living people, but found the article fascinating.

Thank you. There is still one more to come in the this series on the original six women astronauts: Shannon Lucid. I have already completed work on Sally Ride, Judith Resnik, Kathryn Sullivan and Rhea Seddon. I also have one ready on Eileen Collins. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Referring to the subject by her given name seems informal for an encyclopedic entry. WP:Surname indicates that the surname is preferred and distinction between which Fisher can easily be made by calling her spouse Bill. Suggest you use Sims/Fisher throughout.
    Corrected a couple of instances. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3rd sentence seems really long. Possibly better to divide it?: She went back to Germany shortly before the outbreak of World War II to care for her grandmother. Unable to return to the United States due to the war, she served in the German military as a Morse code operator.
    Split sentence. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After the war she had worked" and also "The two had returned", in both instances lose the "had".
    Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Moved about frequently" appears twice, delete one of them.
    Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1st sentence in 2nd paragraph seems really long. Perhaps: On May 5, 1961, when Sims was in the seventh grade at Fort Campbell Kentucky, her teacher brought in a transistor radio. The class listened to the radio broadcast of Alan Shepard becoming the first American in space, causing Sims to contemplate the idea of becoming an astronaut.
    Re-worded this. See if you like it now. Interesting point is that Fisher set her sights on becoming an astronaut early. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lose the "the" before Inorganic Chemistry
    Deleted already. (see above). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "But she saw others who had earned PhDs after six years of work yet still could not find jobs, and decided to pursue medicine instead" seems rather informal for an encyclopedia entry. Perhaps: Noting a lack of employment opportunity for chemists who had earned PhDs, she decided to pursue medicine.
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who was now her fiancé" … No woman has been introduced in this paragraph. Perhaps: who was now Sims's fiancé
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps it would be clearer to say "She was part of the third group, the first to include women, which had twenty applicants to be interviewed".
    I don't see the problem here, and the suggested wording would loser the fact that the applicants were priocessed in groupds of twenty. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lots of "she" in this "she was asked if she wanted to have children, and she told them that she…" Perhaps: Fisher was asked if she wanted to have children and responded not within the next five years.
    Re-worded. (In Australia it is illegal to ask a question like this during an employment interview.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is supposed to be illegal now in the US, but employers still find ways to ask those kinds of questions. I once had an employer ask to meet my husband on a 2nd interview, claiming that as it was a "family business" they liked their team to know the families of who they were hiring. I thought it weird, but brought him. They didn't ask me, they asked him. o.0 SusunW (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The mission insignia Fisher designed" seems a pretty abrupt transition from the previous section. Why was she designing an insignia? For herself or officially? I tried to access the link to the citation but it doesn't work. Correct link clarifies she was asked to design it. Probably needs clarification and definitely needs the link fixed.
    Corrected the link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She was chief (1997-1998) and deputy chief (1998-1999) …in that role" These are 2 different jobs. Do you mean in both roles?
    Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • My concerns about the iconic photo section are similar to Eddie891's. Do we have any high quality sources that discuss the controversy about its origins? I see a lot of speculation in sources that aren't particularly reliable, that it appeared on the cover of Life, which would not likely have published without a photo credit. A search of its magazine covers for that year shows it did not.
    As the article notes, Life never ran it on the cover. The image is part of a whole roll of shots. Although Commons accepts it as a NASA image, I preferred to run it as a WP:NONFREE image, given the uncertainty. I cut the whole section right back, as I felt it included material that properly belonged on the talk page. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoyed reading the article. Please ping me when you have answered to ensure that I respond timely. SusunW (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SusunW: All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:46, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to support. Thanks for your work on the article. SusunW (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from JennyOz

edit

Hello Hawkeye, another fine bio. I have only a few suggestions and questions...

lede

  • became the first mother to fly in space in 1984 - is ambiguous (unless of course there was another mother later in 1984). Either add comma after "space" (same style as "astronauts to include women, in January 1978." just below) or reword to 'in 1984 she became...'
    Re-worded as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

early life

nasa astronaut

STS-51-A

Post-Challenger

Iconic photograph

References books

Thanks and looking forward to the next. JennyOz (talk) 12:32, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing. Shanon Lucid will complete the set of the six original women astronauts. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:55, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi JennyOz, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for ping Gog, somehow this review page had disappeared from my watchlist. Haven't had that happen before, well, at least not that I've noticed! Thanks for tweaks and replies Hawkeye. I just made 2 small edits for you to check. I am pleased to s'port - and do let me know when Lucid ready if I don't notice its nom. JennyOz (talk) 04:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

edit

Footnote numbers refer to this version.

Will check links after these points are addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to post a reply regarding the last two points, but I went back and looked through this FAC to see if others had commented on the image discussion, and Eddie891's comments echo my thoughts. It feels like OR to me. I think it would be better to reduce this to something like "Other than the publicity she does herself, her likeness has been widely shared on the internet and it has been used in various promotions and tribute art. A photograph taken by John Bryson, almost in profile, has been frequently posted on social media sites." Then move all the notes to the talk page in case we can find secondary sources covering this later. The band promotion links are OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With pleasure. Moved to the talk page. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest removing the sentence that says it's an iconic photograph; the sources we have don't allow us to make that sort of broad cultural statement. We can still say it was frequently reposted and used to promote bands. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 17:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. All points addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit

All look good except:

File:Anna Fisher suits up.jpg. One source link is dead and the other gives no information to confirm this as a NASA PD image.
  • The image can be found at [4]. I have updated the link on Commons. In future this may not be possible; link rot is inevitable, but stuff on Commons is not routinely archived like stuff on Wikipedia. We may not be able to find a link even when one still exists. And we need to keep pushing WMF to acquire archive.org. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
File:Sts-51-a-patch.png One dead link (mix.msfc seems to be an issue) and the other won't load for me. How do we know the mission patch was designed by NASA and was not produced outside of the agency and the copyright acquired? Even if it was designed by Fisher, a federal employee, how would it be within the scope of her duties (the requirement for PD works of the federal government) to design insignia?
  • The image is at [5] You can find all the patches via [6]. A major part of an astronaut's duties are publicity related, with publicity tours after every mission, and rostered public relations assignment duty (which most of them dislike to varying degrees). Astronauts have been creating designs for mission patches as part of their duties since the 1960s. In the Shuttle era the logos were used on merchandise, posters etc used at NASA and contractor sites. I hadn't thought of this before, but one of the reasons for having it done by astronauts is as you describe. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the above discussion with Mike Christie, the image page still describes the fair use image as "iconic", you may want to tone that down.
That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Anna_Lee_Fisher/archive1&oldid=1128974721"