This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Please rewrite. The current page is a CV, which is not what we want. Any page must (no exceptions) have sources for all significant statements. In addition notability has to be established. He might be notable (see WP:NPROF) but without a Google Scholar profile passing #C1 is unclear. No major awards are listed for #C2. Please ask questions if needed.
Ldm1954 (talk) 00:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I removed my NPR comment as it was for the old version, so I don't want it to be confused as relevant to the version that has just been accepted via AfC. The November 2024 version is fine. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you also expand a bit on the difference between a biography (which seems to be a standard thing in wikipedia) and a CV in the sense in which you feel this article is currently a CV and not a biography?
I have added a couple of additional references and the note about his Van Biesbroeck prize
My comment was "might be notable" and the point was that there was no proof in the article. You should have included a link to his papers on ADS. However, while he has a few highly cited papers they are team papers, the the one on HEAO 2. We have to discount a bit when there are so many authors, although the award helps a lot.
I suggest reading this guide about academic pages. As a few examples of the difference between a CV and a WP page, there is the sentence "After his PhD, Seward joined the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to work on linear accelerator experiments but in 1960 shifted his interests from nuclear physics to astronomy and space research." This is not notable information, it describes his life. Except for really major figures (e.g. Einstein) we don't do this. Similarly in terms of how you describe his work there is "Seward showed that the X-ray emission from the binary source Sco X-1 was thermal in nature,[9] and discovered several bright X-ray sources in the southern sky." When I follow that link it has 39 cites, which is definitely not highly notable. You should try and limit the research to what is notable, not everything.
.jpg){kind=small}
