Wikipedia:Peer review/Yuri Gagarin/archive1

Yuri Gagarin

I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to get it through FAC before the 60th anniversary of Gagarin becoming the first man in space on 12 April 1961. I hope to have it be the TFA on that date, 12 April 2021. I have taken this article through GAN and an A-class review at WP:MILHIST. However, it has been more than a year since I have worked on.

My main concern is comprehensiveness. There is no ask too big! I own several biographies about Gagarin, and there is probably no information you could ask me to add for which I cannot find a source. While comments about prose and MOS are appreciated please focus on what information should be added to make this biography more complete.

Thanks, --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 22:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• I might say more in the lead about his activities as a cosmonaut, his training for his mission, and his subsequent international tours.
• "Gagarin twice struggled to land the two-seater trainer aircraft, and risked dismissal from pilot training. However, the commander of the regiment decided to give him another chance at landing" I imagine this was at making a landing? He wasn't still up in the air from the failed attempt? Could be clearer.
• "After expressing interest in space exploration following the launch of Luna 3 on 6 October 1959, his recommendation to the Soviet space programme was endorsed and forward by Lieutenant Colonel Babushkin." Should "recommendation" be "application" or similar?
• "Gagarin was a candidate favoured by his peers. When they were asked to vote anonymously for a candidate besides themselves they would like to be the first to fly, all but three chose Gagarin.[25]" I think you're saying the same thing twice. I would cut or merge the first sentence.
• "Psychological tests included placing the candidates in an anechoic chamber in complete isolation; Gagarin was in the chamber on 26 July – 5 August.[33][24] Does this mean that he was there continuously or just on those dates? I note that the refs are not in numerical order, don't know if you're going by the system where they should be or the primary ref first.
• "Gagarin became the first human to orbit the Earth.[43]" He was the first to enter space, too, right? Whereas for the Americans that was two different people. But two paragraphs, on, you give both distinctions. Do we need it twice?
• " Gagarin continues to be internationally recognised as the first human in space and first to orbit the Earth.[49]" Why not just "is" rather than "continues to be". I doubt if it will change.

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:08, 6 September 2020 (UTC)-

• You're probably going to have some trouble with sourcing to RT, WP:RS wise.
• "In 1961 the Olympic sports training center in Chernihiv in Ukraine, was named Stadion Yuri Gagarin and the 25 May 1964, Gagarin in person attended the stadium." Some troubles in second half of sentence.

That's all I have. It doesn't seem overlong. Possibly some of the minor honors, such as street namings, could be cut. Should do well at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Wehwalt, thank you for this review. I will address these issues in a top-down copy-edit of the article. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by hawkeye7

All looks pretty good. Looking foraward to seeing it at FAC.

• I made some minor changes to the referencing to get it the way the picky reviewers at FAC like it. revert anything you disagree with.

• Nikita Kruschev and Star City duplicate links in Personal life; unlink in this section.

• Link conspiracy theories

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:36, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. All done. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 03:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Comments by retired electrician

Some nitpicking about the horrible statue. Forty years passed, but here in Moscow we still detest it:

"The monument is mounted to a 38 m (125 ft) tall pedestal and is constructed of titanium" - not titanium, but titanium alloy with 4% to 6% aluminum content (cf. VT5L specs here). Also, perhaps it should state more clearly that titanium was used not for the [whole] monument, but only for the statue.

"Beside the column is a replica of the descent module used during his spaceflight" - certainly not a replica, take another look: [1]. An artistic rendering, perhaps.

Overall, speaking of statues and columns, these should better be sourced to art and technology specialists, rather than newspaper clips from the other end of the world.

Unrelated, but more important: the article is overloaded with photographs. There are five photos of Gagarin's PR tours; are they all really necessary? etc. The layout looks fine in mobile view and on small desktop displays, but not on wide screens, especially with custom default settings. For example, on my screen the last three images fall into the References section, squeezing reflist to just three columns in place of five. And that's on mere 2560 pixels wide at 125%. Poor 4K users ;) Retired electrician (talk) 21:29, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Retired electrician, thank you for this review. I will address these issues in a top-down copy-edit of the article. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)