Featured articleMercury Seven is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Good topic starMercury Seven is the main article in the Mercury Seven series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 9, 2024.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 8, 2019Featured list candidateNot promoted
April 28, 2019Good article nomineeListed
July 25, 2019Featured article candidatePromoted
July 29, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 9, 2013, April 9, 2019, and April 9, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Unsigned[edit]

who is clayton g casella?

Citation banner[edit]

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)[reply]

"Heroes" heading[edit]

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)[reply]

Bachelor's degrees[edit]

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)[reply]

Pre-review checklist[edit]

@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.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

Changes I made

@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)[reply]

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

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

Featured topic[edit]

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)[reply]

Military Ranks and Positions[edit]

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)[reply]

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