Jump to content

Talk:Francis Birch (geophysicist)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 16:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: Hawkeye7 (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn  16:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


1: Well-written

Check for WP:LEAD:

  1. Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done
  2. Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done
  3. Check for Introductory text:  Done
    • Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done
      • Major Point 1: Early life "A graduate of Harvard University, Birch began working on geophysics as a research assistant. He subsequently spent his entire career at Harvard working in the field, becoming an Associate Professor of Geology in 1943, a professor in 1946, and Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology in 1949, and professor emeritus in 1974. He published over 100 papers." (summarised well in the lead)
      • Major Point 2: World War II "During World War II, Birch participated in the Manhattan Project, working on the design and development of the gun-type nuclear weapon known as Little Boy. He oversaw its manufacture, and went to Tinian to supervise its assembly and loading into Enola Gay, the Boeing B-29 Superfortress tasked with dropping the bomb." (summarised well in the lead)
      • Major Point 3: Post-war "In 1952 he published a paper in which he demonstrated that Earth's mantle is chiefly composed of silicate minerals, the upper and lower mantle are separated by a thin transition zone associated with silicate phase transitions, and the inner and outer core are alloys of crystalline and molten iron. His conclusions are still accepted today." (not a concise summary of the corresponding section in the body, "1952 paper" should be skimmed and other points should be included.)
    • Check for Relative emphasis:  Done
      • Major Point 1: Early life "A graduate of Harvard University, Birch began working on geophysics as a research assistant. He subsequently spent his entire career at Harvard working in the field, becoming an Associate Professor of Geology in 1943, a professor in 1946, and Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology in 1949, and professor emeritus in 1974. He published over 100 papers." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
      • Major Point 2: World War II "During World War II, Birch participated in the Manhattan Project, working on the design and development of the gun-type nuclear weapon known as Little Boy. He oversaw its manufacture, and went to Tinian to supervise its assembly and loading into Enola Gay, the Boeing B-29 Superfortress tasked with dropping the bomb." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
      • Major Point 3: Post-war "In 1952 he published a paper in which he demonstrated that Earth's mantle is chiefly composed of silicate minerals, the upper and lower mantle are separated by a thin transition zone associated with silicate phase transitions, and the inner and outer core are alloys of crystalline and molten iron. His conclusions are still accepted today." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)
    • Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done
      • Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done
        • "Francis Birch (August 22, 1903 – January 30, 1992) was an American geophysicist. He is considered one of the founders of solid Earth geophysics."
      • Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done
      • Check for Proper names and titles:  Done
      • Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
      • Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
      • Check for Pronunciation: None
      • Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done
      • Check for Biographies: NA
      • Check for Organisms: NA
  4. Check for Biographies of living persons: NA
  5. Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done
    • Check for Non-English titles:
    • Check for Usage in first sentence:
    • Check for Separate section usage:
  6. Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done
  7. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None
 Done

Check for WP:LAYOUT:  Done

  1. Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done
    • Check for Headings and sections:  Done
    • Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done
    • Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done
  2. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done
    • Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done
    • Check for Works or publications:  Done
    • Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO):  Done
    • Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done
    • Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER):  Done
    • Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):  Done
    • Check for Links to sister projects:  Done
    • Check for Navigation templates:  Done
  3. Check for Formatting:  Done
    • Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):  Done
    • Check for Links:  Done
    • Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):  Done
 Done

Check for WP:WTW:  Done

  1. Check for Words that may introduce bias:  Done
    • Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):  Done
    • Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):  Done
    • Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):  Done
    • Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):  Done
    • Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):  Done
    • Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):  Done
  2. Check for Expressions that lack precision:  Done
    • Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):  Done
    • Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):  Done
    • Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):  Done
    • Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
  3. Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  Done

Check for WP:MOSFICT:  Done

  1. Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  Done
    • Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI):  Done
    • Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT):  Done
 Done


2: Verifiable with no original research

 Done

Check for WP:RS:  Done

Cross-checked with the other FAs: Edmund Herring, Neil Hamilton Fairley, Landing at Nadzab, Albert Kesselring, James Whiteside McCay, Harry Chauvel, Thomas C. Kinkaid, Leslie Groves, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Kenneth Walker, Thomas Blamey, Douglas MacArthur, Frank Berryman, James B. Conant, Iven Mackay, Walter Krueger, Vernon Sturdee, Enrico Fermi, Niels Bohr

  1. Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (contentious)  Done
    • Is it contentious?: Yes
    • Does the ref indeed support the material?:
  2. Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
    • Who is the author?:
    • Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
    • What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
    • What else has the author published?:
    • Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
  3. Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
  4. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):
 Done

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done

  1. Check for Direct quotations:  Done
  2. Check for Likely to be challenged:  Done
  3. Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP): NA
 Done
  1. Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done
  2. Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done
  3. Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done


3: Broad in its coverage

 Done

Cross-checked with the other FAs: Edmund Herring, Neil Hamilton Fairley, Landing at Nadzab, Albert Kesselring, James Whiteside McCay, Harry Chauvel, Thomas C. Kinkaid, Leslie Groves, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Kenneth Walker, Thomas Blamey, Douglas MacArthur, Frank Berryman, James B. Conant, Iven Mackay, Walter Krueger, Vernon Sturdee, Enrico Fermi, Niels Bohr

  1. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
    1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
    2. Check for Out of scope:
  2. Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
    1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:
    2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
    3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
    4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
    5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):
b. Focused:
 Done
  1. Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
  2. Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):


4: Neutral

 Done

4. Fair representation without bias:  Done

  1. Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  2. Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done
  3. Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done
  4. Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done
  5. Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done
  6. Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done
  7. Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  8. Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done
  9. Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done
  10. Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  11. Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done
  12. Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None
  13. Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None


5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images  Done (PD)

Images:
 Done

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done

  1. Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done
  2. Check for copyright status:  Done
  3. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  Done
  4. Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done

  1. Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done
  2. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done
  3. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done


Hawkeye7, I'm glad to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article:

  • I think the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview for the Post-war.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. All the best, --Seabuckthorn  17:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn  01:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]