Talk:PSLV-C37

Bias

Mentioning critical POV which is in a minority and not mentioning POV that compliment the launch makes article biased Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Esp since the views are of a scam tainted person, G. Madhavan Nair: who was barred from holding any post under the Department of Space. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 04:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Concur. —MBlaze Lightning ^T 04:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:PSLV-C37/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 05:13, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	There is a random </blockquote> that either needs a match, or removed.  Removed I see dove capitalized as DOVE an Dove, keep it consistent.  Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	How did you decide what characteristics to list for the rocket? There are a few missing that I would expect to see, was not sure if you were following a template or something. I'm not the one who added the Infobox. What do you think is missing there? Sorry, to be more clear, I meant: Payload and other parameters (not the infobox) I copied it from PSLV-C34#Mission_parameters For which stage, all of them? The PSLV-C37 used the rocket engine nozzle manufactured by Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh based company Resins and Allied Productions (RAP). This is the 100th nozzle manufactured by RAP being used in a PSLV. That's not in the source [www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/PSLV-C-37-scheduled-for-launch-on-January-27/article16895637.ece].
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Good
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	We did plenty here, I think this article is definitely GA class and anything additional at this point would be me trying to take it to the next level

Discussion

@MBlaze Lightning: Why don't you hit up the things above, and I will take another round at it after? I saw you had started it, just ping me when you are done. A couple back and forth sessions like that and we should be good to go. Kees08 (talk) 04:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Kees08: Thanks for the review and apologies for the delay. I'm waiting for the Copyediting Guild to respond to the request. I'll be sure to ping you once the above concerns are addressed, and copy editing done. —MBlaze Lightning ^T 07:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

It is all good, looks like yours is almost up. Let me know when it is done and we can hit this up after. Kees08 (talk) 00:29, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

@Kees08: Please take a look and see if everything's resolved. —MBlaze Lightning ^T 15:51, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@MBlaze Lightning: Sorry for the delays, just been a bit busy in real life. Address what I have above for the second round of comments and I will hit it with a third round after that. I am still deciding what to do with the payload and other parameters section, I will let you know when I get that figured out. Kees08(Talk) 23:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

All done! —MBlaze Lightning ^T 12:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

Going to dump the things from the table down here that are resolved to declutter it.

Reword this: It carried a total of 104 satellites including the 714 kilograms (1,574 lb) primary payload Cartosat-2D.[2][8][9] The launcher started placing the satellites into a polar Sun-synchronous orbit one after the other after a flight of 16 minutes and 48 seconds. Done

Rephrase this: The total cost of the mission was US$15 million for the 1378 kg payloads.

The future tense of the verbs in the Usage section should be changed.  Done

ISRO can't say anything, its an organization not a person ;). Recommend changing it to something like 'ISRO released a statement that...' : ISRO said that it would Done

Didn't change?  Done

Comma after the word originally: Originally PSLV-C37 was set to launch on 27 January 2017 with 83 satellites. Done

Fix the grammar on this: With addition of twenty more satellites to the payload, the schedule was changed to 15 February 2017. Done

International should not be capitalized here: and the International customers. Done

Change to an Earth: a Earth imaging private Done

The sentence before this ends abruptly, not sure what was supposed to happen with it: weighing around 5 kilograms (11 lb) each separated from the rocket in different directions to avoid collision. Done

Do they or do they not require renewal? That insinuates to me that it is possible for them to be refueled, is that the case? - These satellites have a lifespan of about two to three years and would require regular renewal. Nope. Clarified

Add in author names when you can, like in the second citation and in the HuffPo citation. The HuffPo article also came from Space.com, I would prefer the link to come from there, but you need to add space.com to the citation either way. Done

Fix dead link if you can, it is not required though. Done

Dove satellites should not just link to the main Planet Labs article, either redlink Dove satellites or link it to an appropriate section.  Done

Is that see also necessary? Does not seem closely related. Removed

Is there really not a single free image of this launch vehicle, the satellites, the launch, or anything like that? Is ISRO's copyright different than NASA's? I've added an image of the Satish Dhawan Space Centre from Commons.

Thanks. Too bad ISRO's copyright is like it is.

They cannot really be 'envisioned' for experiments anymore, they are in space. Either they have experiments planned for them, or they do not: INS-1A and INS-1B are technology demonstrator nanosatellites envisioned for various experiments.  Done

Fix this grammar: 103 co-passenger satellites contributed to approximately 664 kilograms (1,464 lb) making the total payload of 1,378 kilograms (3,038 lb). Done

Try this instead: 'The 103 co-passenger satellites weighed approximately 664 kilograms (1,464 lb), bringing the total payload mass to 1,378 kilograms (3,038 lb).'  Done

Reword this: The LEMUR satellites, each weighing 4.6 kilograms (10 lb), carried two different payloads namely SENSE for vessel tracking purposes and STRATOS for atmospheric measurements  Done

I think there should be a hyphen between micro and research: is a micro research satellite.  Done

In this instance, 'the' should not be capitalized in 'the Netherlands'  Fixed

In some citations and in the text, ISRO is capitalized ISRO, sometimes Isro. Keep it consistent for whatever it is supposed to be.  Done

Rephrase from: 'Weighing roughly 5 kilograms (11 lb), each separated from the rocket in different directions to avoid collision.'

To: 'Weighing roughly 5 kilograms (11 lb) each, the satellites separated from the rocket in different directions to avoid collision.'  Done

I do not think it should be 'the ISRO,' for the same reason we do not call it 'the NASA.' I believe in all those instances it should just be ISRO.  Fixed

Move citations from the lead to the body of the article.  Done

Still looks like they are in the lead?  Done

Since you started this with an em dash, it should end in it as well, so go from ' — the INS-1A and INS-1B, will' to '— the INS-1A and INS-1B — will'  Done

Capitalize Earth  Done

Add some wikilinks to the caption

Research of what? A bit generic as written. - BGUSAT from Israel is used primarily for research and avionic systems. Clarified

Did they specifically how much money they are recovering yet? - The ISRO released a statement stating that it will recover half of the mission's cost from the foreign countries whose satellites it launched. Nope.

I would recommend rephrasing these sentences to say something like 'Al Farabi-1, designed by Kazakhstan's space agency' (whatever their space agency is called). The way it is currently phrased makes the satellites sound like citizens of the countries. Maybe I am being a little too nitpicky. ' Al Farabi-1 from Kazakhstan, Nayif-1 from the United Arab Emirates, and PEASSS from The Netherlands are technology demonstrator satellites whereas DIDO-2 from Switzerland is a micro research satellite. BGUSAT from Israel is used primarily for research and avionic systems.'  Done

Is this number of significant digits really necessary? Also, convert to miles: at an altitude of 510.383 km
 Done

This didn't change?

Special:Diff/773965312

Sorry, I should have been more specific. The number of significant digits refers to the fact that the number is 510.383, instead of just rounding to a nice number like 510. Generally when writing about scientific things, the writer will round to the nearest 'reasonable' number. It was something my professors got after me about until I got better at it. Does that make more sense? For example, if it was really necessary (and I do not think it is), I would probably write it as 510,383 meters instead, and even then I would round it to maybe 510,400 meters. Let me know if you disagree. Kees08(Talk)
 Done