Talk:Shuttle-Mir Program
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space. | |
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Related projects: | ||
 |
WikiProject Space exploration | Importance to Space exploration: High |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
 |
A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article. |
 |
Shuttle-Mir Program has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review. | ||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
 |
To-do list for Shuttle-Mir Program: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
||
I placed this article in Category:Human spaceflight programmes since it was not in any category.Gerry Ashton 16:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
What is the difference between this and part of the mir article? I suggest that these two articles be merged, or that this article is changed. Fireemblem 00:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, I changed it, and intend to get it up to FA status. Colds7ream 17:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Class
In accordance with the Wikiproject: Space Exploration assessment criteria, I have reclassed the article as a B class. I believe I have sufficiently expanded it enough to fulfill these criteria, although I still have a considerable amount of work to do on it. If anyone disagrees, please don't hesitate to reclassify it again as you see fit. Colds7ream 19:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] References
Shouldn't point to Wikipedia articles. Please insert the original citations. - Francis Tyers · 16:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Done. Colds7ream 17:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] good article
Congratulations to all who have worked on this article. It is now GA-class. Adding more citations may improve this article slightly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Themcman1 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Typos
Just a quick note to say thanks for the typo corrections that people have been doing, but to point out that, according to the Manual of Style,
- Articles should use the same spelling system and grammatical conventions throughout.
- Each article should have uniform spelling and not a haphazard mix of different spellings, which can be jarring to the reader. For example, do not use center in one place and centre in another in the same article (except in quotations or for comparison purposes).
- If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoke conflict by changing to another. (Sometimes, this can happen quite innocently, so please do not be too quick to make accusations!)
As such, i'd be grateful if people could please make sure to make corrections in British English, as that's what i've written the article in, me being a Brit and all. :-) On the other hand, welcome to the article, all new people! Thanks for the help! Colds7ream 08:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Sorry about my corrections on 07:25, 28 March 2007. I wasn't aware of the above, so I'll keep it in mind next time.
- Keep up the good work on the article. Tinsue 08:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks very much - I appreciate the help! Colds7ream 11:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
