This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Linda Ham article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Murderer
If anyone is wondering where this article is going, I'll explain here...the Columbia disaster occurred as the result of a complex sequence of technical and human decisions and actions. Linda Ham's involvement in this sequence was very key and crucial. Using the references you see listed at the bottom of the article, I plan to construct a neutral, fair, and complete article that covers her involvement in the Columbia tragedy. The article will be extensively sourced, with in-line references for every assertion. Once completed, I will submit for peer review to make sure the article is NPOV and adequately written, and then I will nominate for Featured Article status. This process will take several months because FA standards are very high and I want this article to be at the standard I put into the history articles I edit, but it will be completed. If anyone else would like to jump-in and help out, please feel free to do so, the references you need are there and most of them are available on the web. This story is notable and needs to be told in Wikipedia. I welcome any comments or suggestions. Cla68 02:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
In France we have old reruns of SNL episodes. There is a part with Linda Ham from NASA (and obviously it is is pre-Columbia). Is it her who is caricatured ? Hektor 22:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the article needs more information about Ham's time as flight director. As it is, the first twenty years of her career at NASA are subsumed under the heading "Early career," which surely is pushing it a bit. I've been compiling a list of the missions and shifts that she worked as flight director (from NASA press releases). The article ought to discuss at least the most notable of these missions, which shouldn't be that hard to do.
I've also been wondering about how to organise the section on the Columbia disaster. What you've written so far is extremely good: clear, factual, and excellent prose. On the other hand, it seems to be more about CAIB than about Ham so far. I wonder whether this section should tell the story more chronologically: that is, start by describing the Columbia mission, and Ham's role as a member of the MMT, before discussing the outcome of the mission and the CAIB's verdict. Just a thought. I'd be interested to know how you're planning to structure the rest of the section and the rest of the article. MLilburne 17:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The recently added quote "O'Keefe said she is so talented there is going to be a 'bidding war' for her among NASA facilities" is sourced to the New York Times in the main text, but to a Washington Post article in the relevant footnote. Would the provider of the quote please correct or clarify. —DCGeist 03:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Seems to me that there ought to be a picture of Ham as a flight director, but the only ones available are quite poor. For example, this one. Opinions? MLilburne 08:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
I've of the opinion that Ham was unfairly singled out for criticism after the Columbia accident, based largely on the infamous "...there's nothing we can do about it anyway" quote, which referred to a possible turnaround delay for Columbia, not the foam strike damage to the wing. I've tried to add some contextual comments to the article.
No one gets to be a flight director or a top manager at NASA by being a shy and retiring type, and Ham's drive to achieve seems to have irked a fair number of males along the way. I'm not an apologist for Ms. Ham, I've never met her, but there seems to have been a double-standard at work. Legendary flight director Gene Kranz was certainly no pussycat, yet the hard-charging Ham seems to have been unfairly singled out for similar behavior. In particular one can refer to the Langewiesche article in the Atlantic, which mentions Ham's alleged behavior and manner of dress. It should be noted that Langewiesche never interviewed Ham directly, and the article, though rich in technical details, smacks of a thinly disguised demolition job.
I think it's fair to say that Ham was the product of the culture inside NASA at the time.
Response: I'm not suggesting that Ms. Ham should not be held accountable, but she is not solely accountable. There was no way to know that there was a hole in the wing. Columbia was not equipped with a robotic arm that could have taken pictures of the wing's leading edge. It's doubtful that a hole in the wing could be seen from a ground-based camera under even the most ideal conditions. There were indeed options to try a repair, but given the size of the hole, such jury-rigging would only have delayed the breakup. Sure, it's tempting to imagine a scenario where a second shuttle was scrambled into orbit to make a thrilling rescue - but how, in good conscience, could you launch a second orbiter when you don't know it won't be damaged as well? It's a grim calculus... --MBC
The agency has struggled since the Apollo era with communication issues, and the Challenger and Columbia accidents prove that there is more work to be done. The system is supposed to reward and encourage those at "the bottom" who bring potential problems to those in charge. In both accidents that didn't happen, though of the two the Challenger accident is the best example. Foam hitting the shuttle was not thought to be a safety concern, whereas O-ring burn through on the solid rocket boosters was, but was dismissed as an "acceptable" risk.
It's easy to paint Linda Ham as a callous technocrat, but the truth, as always, is far more complex and interesting.
--Mike Chapman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.229.193 (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
References
The bio of Kenneth Ham indicates that he is now married to the former Michelle Lucas of Hobart, Indiana. So I get from there that there has been a divorce at some point ? Hektor (talk) 10:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm assuming American English is appropriate for this article, since she is American and worked for NASA. (I could find no other obvious British spelling or usage.) This word (and its root, to be "seconded") is so alien to American English, until I looked it up I thought it was a typo. Since there seems to be no obvious American equivalent, and the sentence doesn't really suffer without it, I simply deleted it. JustinTime55 (talk) 18:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
In this section about her early career it states that she was the first female section head at the JSC center. This is incorrect info. In the Bio of Ivy Hooks at the NASA site located at:
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/HooksIF/HooksIF_Bio.pdf
The info in question on that page reads for Ivy F. Hooks the accomplishments:
Head, Aerodynamics Systems Analysis Section, Aerodynamics Branch, Engineering Analysis Division, Engineering and Development Directorate (1973–1977)
Chief, Flight Software Branch, Spacecraft Software Division, Mission Support Directorate (1982–1984)
The fact sheet indicates that at least one other female held the management positions of both a Section Head and, later the next level manager higher, of Branch Chief before Linda Ham did. I think a number of others also held such positions but this was the most obvious "earlier" proof (since Linda did not graduate until 1982).
ref: http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/HooksIF/HooksIF_Bio.pdf_Bio.pdf
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.225.92.73 (talk) 08:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Linda Ham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore))
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot))
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))
).
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).
Cheers.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberbot II (talk • contribs) 07:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Linda Ham. 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:
((dead link))
tag to http://dev.space.com/missionlaunches/rtf_floridatoday_specialreport.htmlWhen 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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:28, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Someone has reverted my correction. Ham was NOT the first female flight director. I worked in Mission Control Room in the late '80's when Michele Brekke was a female flight director. See for example Michele Brekke and https://cse.umn.edu/college/feature-stories/michele-brekke-aiming-higher . Would someone take some initiative to make this article accurate? Thanks. 73.32.71.188 (talk) 10:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
I have a problem with this sentence:"Ham's on-the-job persona was reported to be somewhat brusque and she was perceived by some below her in the chain of command as being less than willing to embrace dissenting points of view." This sentence is likely motivated by her gender rather than some actual issue, and is irrelevant to her failure of judgement. It should be removed.40.142.183.146 (talk) 21:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)