Wikipedia:Peer review/History of Mars observation/archive1

History of Mars observation

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article covers the most significant historical aspects of our Earth-based observations regarding the Red Planet. Please take a look and let me know how it could be further improved.

Thank you, RJH (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I found the article very interesting - and at the same time deeply frustrating, since a lot of it was beyond my understanding even with the use of links when available. I suspect that other readers may find the same problem. In the points listed below I draw attention to some specific instances, but the problem is general. Apart from this issue, most of the points I raise are minor matters (grammar, style, etc)

• Lead
  • "Detailed records regarding the position of the planet Mars were made by Babylonian astronomers and they developed..." Awkward conjunction "and they"; better: "...astronomers who developed..." ✓
  • Two successive sentences ending with "of the planet". Suggest the second of these becomes: "the planet's motions". ✓
  • "Mars was first observed using a telescope by Galileo Galilei in 1610." As worded, there is multiple ambiguity here. The intended meaning is that the first telescopic observation of Mars was by Galileo in 1610, and the sentence should be rephrased accordingly. ✓
  • "Martian" and "martian" both used; I suspect the former is correct. ✓
  • "...multiple robotic spacecraft have been sent to explore Mars from orbit and the surface in detail." Ungrammatical sentence end. ✓
  • Last sentence: Does this refer to the discovery on Earth of Martian meteorites? ✓
  • Image: I note that NASA images emanating from the Soviet/Russian Space Agency are not necessarily PD. ✓
    • I think the combined image in the lead comes from the Russian wikipedia, rather than their space agency.
• Earliest records
  • Why is the motion of Mars "retrograde"? ✓
  • "notably missing": editorial comment? ✓
  • Last sentence: is there any reason why planetary theory suddenly became of interest to the Greeks at this time? ✓
• Orbital models
  • A problem with this section is the number of technical terms which general readers may find off-putting. True, these are generally linked, but sometimes the link article is equally opaque. For example epicycle-deferent; angular velocity; angular diameter; arcminutes and others. Without suggesting a general dumbing down, I think it might be helpful to have a little more explanation in the text (this is a factor in other sections, too). ✓
    • Hopefully I've clarified the jargon.
  • "This elegant approach..." reads like editorial opinion ✓
  • "became an adherent the Copernican system" - the word "to" is missing ✓
  • "succeeded at" → "succeeded in" ✓
• Early telescope observation
  • "During the oppositions of 1651, 1653 and 1655..." What are "oppositions"? (NB I notice that the term is linked later - it should be linked here, or explained, at first mention) ✓
  • "The Italian astronomer Giovanni Domenico Cassini was perhaps the first to definitively mention the southern polar ice cap of Mars in 1666." This phrasing creates ambiguity in a sentence already confused by the double qualifications of "perhaps" and "definitively". The meaning and the caveats would be clearer if this was rephrased: "Perhaps the first definitive mention of Mars's southern polar ice cap was by the Italian astronomer Giovanni Domenico Cassini, in 1666". ✓
  • What does "perihelical" mean? ✓
• Geographical period
  • The Proctor map needs complete details relating to its first publication ✓
  • What is meant by "spectrum" in this context? ✓
• Martian canals
  • The caption to the Schiaparelli map should indicates which are the "canali" ✓
  • "He advocated for the existence of just such inhabitants..." The word "just" is superfluous ✓
• Refining planetary parameters
  • "Previous detections of water in the atmosphere of Mars were blamed upon..." I think "explained by" rather than "blamed upon" ✓
  • On the matter previously raised about accessible prose, take this extract: "Baltic German astronomer Hermann Struve used the observed speed of rotation of the apsides of the Martian moons to determine the amount of secular perturbation caused by the planet's oblateness. In 1895, he published a value of 1/190 for this rotational flattening. In 1911, he refined the value to 1/192. I defy anyone without considerable prior knowledge to interpret the meaning of this, even with the help of links. ✓
  • "aphelic"? ✓
• Remote sensing
  • "This worldwide program focused significant activity on observing the development of dust storms..."; "focused significant activity on" is very heavy-handed prose; could you try something smoother? ✓
  • "X-ray emission from Mars was first observed in 2001 using the Chandra X-ray Observatory." "Using the..."? Surely, "from the" or "by the"? ✓
    • In this case the observatory is an orbiting spacecraft. The images are sent to the Earth for interpretation. Maybe it should say "first observed by astronomers"? ✓
  • Sadly, much of this section is beyond the understanding of laypersons. ✓
    • I've tried to make the section more transparent. Hopefully that makes some difference. Unfortunately some technical terms are still necessary.

In all, an impressive article. I believe, however, that some parts will need to be redrafted in a more reader-friendly manner prior to a FAC submission. Brianboulton (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the extensive and helpful review. I'll try to rework the article to make the technical prose clearer.—RJH (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)