Talk:Manuel Foster Observatory/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 12:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review the article.

Review comments

Lead section / infobox

~~The lead doesn’t adequately summarise the article’s contents, and needs to be expanded. See MOS:LEAD for further guidance.~~
I added a perfunctory paragraph. Praemonitus (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Seeing as the article is about a Chilean monument, the name for it in Spanish should be included.~~
Okay. Praemonitus (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Link philanthropist.~~
Linked. Praemonitus (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Lick observatory - ‘Lick Observatory’.
Done. Praemonitus (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Introduce W. W. Campbell.~~
Clarified. Praemonitus (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~I see no need for citations in the lead section, as the information is not controversial.~~
It is housed – it needs to be clear what it is referring to here.
Addressed. Praemonitus (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The image (a 2016 photograph) needs a caption. Alternatively I would suggest using this, which shows the observatory as it once appeared when in use. If you use it, you don't need the link in the External links section.
Caption added; I prefer the modern image for the lead. Praemonitus (talk) 16:04, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

More comments to follow. Amitchell125 (talk) 11:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1 History

N The section is split into four subsections, but only three are given titles. I would give the first section a title as well (e.g. Background).
I'm not seeing anything in the MOS about requiring a header for this introductory section. I think that just adds clutter. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for not being clearer. You won't a requirement (see MOS:SNO), but not all the text down to the subsection D. O. Mills Expedition relates directly to history of the observatory, which is what readers might expect when they see the title 'History'. The idea of a southern hemisphere observatory appears at When Campbell brought the need for a southern observatory.... Everything before this should be in a different (sub)section, and it would make sense if the text starting from this place was in the D. O. Mills Expedition. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:38, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I don't agree with you on this. A paragraph break at that point would be inappropriate. The 'D. O. Expedition' section is about the actual expedition, not the motivation, planning, and preparation. (I ended up changing the section title, which is regrettable because the original was better.) Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Link flexure; parabolic glass mirror (Parabolic reflector); Los Angeles; spectroscopic (Spectroscopy).~~
Linked. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
91 cm telescope – this needs to be in cm and inches.
Added. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Improve the prose slightly by adding a comma after use in May 1895.~~
I modified the sentence slightly (see next). Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it proved highly successful – replace it with what is being referred to. (Wherever it, its or a pronoun occurs, you need to check that readers can easily understand what the subject being referred to is.)
Removed the 'it'. Praemonitus (talk)
It was in 1894 that Campbell first – consider simplifying to something like ‘In 1894, Campbell’.
Changed. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the Solar System motion – ‘the motion of the Solar System’ sounds better imo.
I tweaked it. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On August 12, 1900, the director of the Lick observatory, James Edward Keeler, suddenly died - ‘The director of the Lick observatory, James Edward Keeler, died on 12 August 1900’?
Changed. Praemonitus (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the attention of D. O. Mills - ‘the attention of Mills’ (it’s standard to only use the surname once the person has been mentioned).
The article already mentioned the Mills spectrograph, so this disambiguation seems useful. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy with that. AM

generously – is a word to watch and I would avoid it (see MOS:PEACOCK).
Removed. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
$26,075 should be converted, perhaps using https://www.in2013dollars.com/1860-dollars-in-2017?amount=1
I added an equivalent. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(The resulting cost was one eighteenth the cost of the Lick observatory main telescope.) – why the brackets?
Removed. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Chilean capitol – ‘Chilean capital’.
Corrected. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
refiguring, which may be an unfamiliar term to some readers, needs to be briefly explained.
I added a link. An explanation comes from the previous sentence. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
December, 1901; February, 1903 – no commas required here.
Removed. Praemonitus (talk) 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
N Some of the text in this part of the article relates directly to the following subsection about the expedition, and needs to be moved there.
I changed the title of the next section. Praemonitus (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1.1 D. O. Mills Expedition

~~Link focus (Focus (optics)); tarnish; exposure (Exposure (photography))~~.
Linked. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Santiago, Chile is not needed in the caption.
Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
he was injured – the source says seriously injured, and I would amend the text to reflect this.
Added. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
William Wallace Campbell or W.W. Campbell (as in the lead)?
Updated. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What followed was a delay of a month – ‘After a month-long delay’ sounds better imo.
That sentence wouldn't make sense. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly. To improve the quality of the prose, I meant to amend to something like 'After a month-long delay due to a riotous strike in the port, he gear was unloaded, and then transported...". Amitchell125 (talk) 15:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed, reluctantly. I thought it sounded fine when read out loud and it better emphasized the impact of the riot. Praemonitus (talk) 15:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 1, 1904 – ‘1 June 1904’ removes a comma.
I moved the date to the end of the sentence. Praemonitus (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1.2 Extended funding

~~Link declination; machine shop; bearings (Bearing (mechanical)); nebulae.~~
- Linked. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~In the caption, Exterior view of the observation dome, as of 2016 could be simplified to something like ‘The observation dome, photographed in 2016’~~
- Done. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The two year observation program came to an end - ‘The observation program ended’.
- Revised. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
plates – amend to 'photographic plates' (linked).
- Done. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Twenty two – should be ‘22’, for the sake of consistency. I suggest amending the text to something like ‘The astronomers discovered 22 stars with variable radial velocities’.
- Revised. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Ditto two hundred; thirteen, etc..~~
- Modified specifically for astronomical objects. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~The link to silvering needs to be moved up to where it first occurs (silvered parabolic glass mirror).~~
- Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
D. O. Mills and other variations of his name in this section – needs to be amended to ‘Mills’.
- I changed the first. The other instances are needed to disambiguate from his son. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~I would query whether Paddock is notable enough to warrant having a red link. Thoughts?~~
- It's borderline, but I'll take out the link for now. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
several improvements – several is redundant, as the text goes on to explain them.
- Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
two prism – ‘two-prism’?
- Sure, why not? Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~The link to war service is imo unnecessary.~~
- It links to the specific war, so it seemed appropriate. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

I modified the sentence to clarify. Praemonitus (talk) 17:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

apex of solar motion should be linked, not just apex.
- Okay, that makes sense. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
produced. 48 candidate - ‘ ‘produced, and 48 candidate’?
- I'd prefer those remain separate. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

had spectrograms taken, measured, and the data collected – ‘had been measured’ seems sufficient here.
- It is important to mention these are spectroscopic measurements. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

came to an end in 1917 – ‘ended in 1917’?
- Done. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wilson was assisted by math instructor Arthur A. Scott from the Instituto Ingles in Santiago, beginning in 1913 until he resigned June, 1917, then by Charles M. Huffer- seems excessively detailed for this article.
- I'm not sure I agree. Praemonitus (talk) 16:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, AM

1.3 Purchase

~~The title is misleading, as the text discusses more than just a purchase that occurred.~~
Updated. Praemonitus (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Who was Manuel Foster Recabarren?~~
I added a link to a spanish-language biography. Praemonitus (talk) 15:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
then donated to – ‘who then donated it to’?
Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 15:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~I would add a comma after During the 1940s.~~
Done. Praemonitus (talk) 15:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
for spectroscopy of – amend to 'who used it to study’?
This was stated earlier in the sentence. I reworded it slightly. Praemonitus (talk) 15:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the growing metropolis - ‘the growth of Santiago’?
Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 15:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
technical and economic problems – some explanation is needed here, as it isn’t clear why the observatory was able to continue working after 1982, having (according to the text) been closed for four decades.
Unfortunately there isn't much additional information available. I changed the wording slightly to avoid saying 'closure'. Praemonitus (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These observations became degraded over time – is an ambiguous statement (the early records deteriorated? It became more difficult to make good enough measurements?)
Reworded. Praemonitus (talk)
It ceased – presumably ‘the observatory ceased’, in which case the text should say this.
Fixed. Praemonitus (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~What has happened since 1995, apart from it becoming a monument? See https://astro.uc.cl/en/observatorio-foster/ (and possibly elsewhere) for more information that needs to be added.~~
Thanks for the link. I added a few more details, but other links don't seem to be as reliable. Praemonitus (talk) 16:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3 References

Not GA, but it’s worth noting that when I last counted them, 25 of the sources listed in this section (and three in the section below) were over half a century old. Whilst they seem to be reliable enough, more recent sources might be preferable, if they exist (see WP:OLDSOURCES).
I'll just note that this is primarily a history article that uses the original sources for tactical details. The newer sources mostly cover it at a higher level. Sorry but I can't really address this in a significant way. Praemonitus (talk) 15:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

On hold

I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 8 January to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 14:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the work you've started. I've begun to cross out issued that are addressed. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed review. Praemonitus (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for your work on the article. I'll be adding a small cross (

) by any comments not crossed out, and coming back to them later. Amitchell125 (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Passing

I can happily live with the article as it now stands—it's clearly now a GA. Congratulations and thanks. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]