Talk:Val Logsdon Fitch

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Val Logsdon Fitch article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Val Logsdon Fitch has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 30, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Biography: Military / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: Biography / Technology / North America / United States / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

‹See TfM›

Physics: Biographies High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

New York (state): Columbia University Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Columbia University (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Nebraska

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Nebraska portal This article is supported by WikiProject Nebraska.

Chicago

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Val Logsdon Fitch appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 June 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Val Logsdon Fitch found "the answer to the physicist's 'Why do we exist?'"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Val Fitch.

Wikipedia

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Val Logsdon Fitch/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 20:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7, I will be engaging in a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian (talk) 20:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Hawkeye7, I've completed a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of your article and I find that it exceeds the criteria for Good Article status. I do, however, have a few suggestions and comments that must be addressed prior to its passage. Thank you for all your phenomenal work on this article. -- West Virginian (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede adequately stands alone as a concise overview of Fitch's life. The lede defines Fitch's accomplishments, establishes context for Fitch, explains why Fitch is notable, and summarizes the most important points of Fitch's biography.
The info box template is beautifully formatted, and its contents are cited within the prose, utilizing inline citations.
The image of Fitch has been released into the public domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
The lede's content is well-written, its contents are sourced and cited within the prose below, and its references are verifiable. I have no comments or suggestions for this section.

Early life

I recommend leaving the first paragraph of this section within the "Early life" section, and moving its second and third paragraphs into a section entitled "Early career."
Done That leaves Early Life with only one paragraph. Normally in scientific biographies, everything up to when they complete their PhD goes into this section. Whereas with military ones it ends when they join the Army. I've created a new section "Manhattan Project", so Fitch's biography now looks like a military one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While Wikipedia:Inline citation does not specify this, it may improve the flow if citations are consolidated at the end of sentences, but this is merely a suggestion and is not a deal breaker for Good Article status.
It would not hurt to wiki-link atomic bomb to Nuclear weapon.
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This section's content is well-written, its contents are sourced and cited within its prose, and its references are verifiable. I have no additional comments or suggestions for this section.

Physics

I recommend renaming this section "Academic career" or "Research career," which may encapsulate its contents better than "Physics."
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps reword as "where he became acquainted with James Cronin"
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This section's content is well-written, its contents are sourced and cited within its prose, and its references are verifiable. I have no additional comments or suggestions for this section.

Publications

This bibliography of works is formatted properly, and I have no comments or suggestions for this section.

All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7, thank you for addressing my comments and suggestions in such a timely manner. Once again, you've outdone yourself and you have crafted a comprehensive article for Fitch. It's been a privilege reviewing this article, and it is hereby a pleasure for me to pass this article to Good Article status. -- West Virginian (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"the answer to the physicist’s 'Why do we exist?'"

This has bothered me since it showed up on the Main Page's "Did you know?" section.

It seems this is a quip, and it was presented as if it was THE one objective answer to this question. It's presented as if someone asked ANY physicist the vague question "Why do we exist?" the automatic response for most of them would be to mention Fitch's work. Is this really the case? It's definitely a necessary condition for human life, but hardly sufficient. I'm not a scientists, but it seems that it's possible to make the case that any number of facts from the article Fine-tuned Universe could be equally presented as "the answer."

Anyway, I'm reluctant to change something that linked to the Main Page, but it just feels misleading the way quote is presented as more than just one person's opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dresdnhope (talk • contribs) 16:57, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]