Talk:Shannon Lucid

Education

I noticed that education is not included in infobox, even though it does mention her thesis title and doctoral advisor. What do others think about including education in infobox?

Ppt91 (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Shannon Lucid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080906090514/http://www.ok.gov/opm/Status_of_Women/Local%20Publish/html/hall_of_fame.html to http://www.ok.gov/opm/Status_of_Women/Local%20Publish/html/hall_of_fame.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140505175753/http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/25422720/nasa-inducts-shannon-lucid-and-jerry-ross-into-the-us-astronaut-hall-of-fame to http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/25422720/nasa-inducts-shannon-lucid-and-jerry-ross-into-the-us-astronaut-hall-of-fame

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:14, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Award

An award that Lucid won that can be added to article (I am working on something else right now). Kees08 (Talk) 03:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 07:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

I'll be reviewing this article. I can't imagine it's going to fail, but all the same, I'll go over it and check everything. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Prose is exemplary. A few minor typos, but I fixed them as I read the article.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   The lead cuts off after 2003, leaving the rest ambiguous. I've added a sentence on her retirement. In the body, I changed the phrases "gave teeth" and "you".

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Has notes and references lists.

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   Comprehensive citations. All sources appear to be reliable.

   C. It contains no original research:

   Comprehensive citations. Spot check suggests information accurately corresponds to citations.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   No apparent violations. Passes Earwig test.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   Adequately covers early life and career

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   The only section of concern is STS-58. It goes into detail about the roles and responsibilities of other members of the crew, which may be unnecessary for this article. After consideration, this information is still brief enough to provide reasonable context.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   None of that pesky anti-space bias (or any other editorial bias).

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   No recent edits.

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   All images are tagged as public domain.

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   All images are relevant and have descriptive captions.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   The article meets and exceeds the GA criteria in nearly all areas. I found no issues but a few minor nitpicks that could be fixed immediately, so I've addressed them myself. This article easily passes its good article nomination. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 08:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by RoySmith (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Shannon Lucid

• ... that when astronaut Shannon Lucid (pictured) returned to Earth after six months in orbit, she was presented with a box of M&M's? Source: Down to earth: after a record 188 days in space, Shannon Lucid was still standing. It was one large step for a woman, one small step for NASA's new breed of astronaut "Although the 53-year-old astronaut was 'wobbly and woozy,' according to David Leestma, NASA's director of flight-crew operations, she walked the 25 feet to the transporter, making up with pure grit what 188 days and 67,454,841 nautical miles in space had wrung out of her in muscle and bone strength. 'She's in great shape,' exulted NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin. He met Lucid in the crew transporter with a huge gold-wrapped box of M&M's from President Clinton (during her six months on the Russian space station Mir, Lucid issued more SOS's for M&M's than a castaway for a rescue ship)."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Geographia Sacra seu Phaleg et Canaan

Improved to Good Article status by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:09, 8 October 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was promoted to GA status within the required timeframe. It is well-sourced with inline citations being used throughout the article and the article coverage being neutral. Hook is interesting and stated in the article prose with a source backing it up. QPQ has been done. Good to go! Aria1561 (talk) 03:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

• @Hawkeye7 and Aria1561: any chance I could get a hook on "Lucid issued more SOS's for M&M's than a castaway for a rescue ship"? Is that true? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

  The source is here. It's hyperbolic of course. She just asked for them a lot. I would have to add it to the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:46, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

  Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

• ALT1: ...that during her stay on Mir, astronaut Shannon Lucid (pictured) "issued more SOS's for M&M's than a castaway for a rescue ship"? Same source

Giving the green light for ALT1. I just added some appropriate hyperlinks for the readers. Aria1561 (talk) 03:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Full name

Some sources (e.g. [1]) indicate that she has kept her original middle name, and as such her full name is "Shannon Matilda Wells Lucid". Should we do so likewise in this article, unless there's a better source to the contrary? — RAVENPVFF · talk · 21:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I didn't have a reliable source for it, and NASA consistently refers to Shannon W. Lucid. I wasn't sure what the American custom was; in Australia women do not retain their maiden names when changing their names by deed poll after marriage. But since you've provided a source, I have added it to the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

"she disliked Islam"

@Hawkeye7: I don't have access to the book; what does she say about Islam in No Sugar Added? Maybe that book should be added as a citation, as right now it seems the only support for this statement is the Fabian quote in Evans's book? Levivich (talk) 00:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I've deleted that bit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I think that's an improvement. Sorry to keep hammering at this, but now it says: A devout Christian, she disapproved of the way Saudi Arabia treated women. What does being a devout Christian have to do with her disapproval of the way Saudi Arabia treated women? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say, A lifelong feminist, she disapproved of the way Saudi Arabia treated women, or something like that? It seems to me that she was known for being an outspoken and pioneering feminist, including during that particular mission, and that this is more relevant to why she had issue with Saudi Arabia's treatment of women, than her religion? And by the way, I should have said this much earlier, but: thank you for writing this article up to FA! Levivich (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)