Talk:Space Shuttle Endeavour launches for final time

Just a note to the reviewer, background information (such as Charles Bolden's spaceflight history) was retrieved from Wikipedia. Tyrol5 (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source; Wikipedia explicitly maintains that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. It is not an acceptable source of background information for a Wikinews article. --Pi zero (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sources question

What's the purpose of the Spaceflight Now live update and the STS-134 page on nasa.gov they don't seem to serve any purpose? --Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 16:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1232533 [Failed]

Revision 1232533 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The talk page states some of this information is from Wikipedia. That needs fixing: Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and itself steadfastly maintains it is not a reliable source. It's been suggested on the talk page that there may be two unused sources. Note (in case this should be so) that inclusion of unused sources is actually a policy violation — see WN:CITE. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1232533 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The talk page states some of this information is from Wikipedia. That needs fixing: Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and itself steadfastly maintains it is not a reliable source. It's been suggested on the talk page that there may be two unused sources. Note (in case this should be so) that inclusion of unused sources is actually a policy violation — see WN:CITE. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

How would you like me to cite the background info (it's undisputed that Bolden flew in space four times, etc.). And the live updates/nasa.gov page were used for mission information (i.e. payloads, objectives, in-flight events). Thanks, Tyrol5 (talk) 20:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Supposing Wikipedia got the information from somewhere on-line with a trust-worthy reputation, you could use that source. See WN:CITE. --Pi zero (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I added a nasa source for the Bolden info. All other background info was retrieved from NASA's shuttle page and mission updates/other articles (the sources do not go unused). Tyrol5 (talk) 10:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1233228 [Passed]

Revision 1233228 of this article has been reviewed by Calebrw (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Close to stale, but not there yet. Looks like the sourcing issues have been fixed. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1233228 of this article has been reviewed by Calebrw (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Close to stale, but not there yet. Looks like the sourcing issues have been fixed. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Embedded video

Just as a FYI, it would be preferable if lower resolution video is used when embedded in news articles.

Unlike stills, video is sent at full resolution and it is left for the viewer's browser to resize it. So, if we're only going to embed a 150px video, we should scale the video and put the lower-res copy on Commons. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 14:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)