Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry Glicken/archive1

Harry Glicken

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it is nearing an FA level and I'd like some feedback, particularly on the prose and comprehensiveness of the article.

Thanks, ceranthor 04:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments:

Lead

• General: The lead is a little short, and needs to be extended to provide a more complete summary of the whole article.

Should be a little better now.

• Date rather than year of death should be given in the lead. Is his date of birth unknown?

Nope. I can't find it anywhere.

• "he claimed responsibility for the death of fellow volcanologist David A. Johnston..." That wording reads as though he was taking pride in an achievement. I suggest something more muted, e.g. "he felt responsible for the death..." etc

Fixed.

• You should also avoid the awkward "Johnston, Johnston" combination, e.g. "who had switched with Glicken so that..." etc

Yup.

Life and career

• Consider subdividing, rather than one section covering his life from cradle to grave.

I tried this before, but it didn't flow right... too many choppy sections.

• No details of early life, family background? (Birthplace, where he went to school, etc?)

If you can find it... please let me know! I have no idea where it would be, anyway.

• You should briefly explain why was it necessary to "monitor Mount St. Helens"? (No need to repeat the mountain's name in the same line.)
• What was the nature of the interview that took Glicken away from the volcano?
• "but Glicken was excluded from it..." What does this mean - that he was not allowed into the observatory? Were only PhDs allowed in?
• You say he was "only a student". You mention earlier that he had graduated from Stanford, so where did he continue his studies, and with what eventual outcome?
• "Glicken's offer to conduct his own research was declined". Declined by whom?
• "Glicken attacked his work" – what does this mean?
• "they puzzled together..." – odd choice of verb, and not clear as to meaning
• I think when you say that he "isolated" employees at the Survey, you mean he isolated himself from them. Perhaps better say he "antagonised" them.
• "he became depressed and pulled his hair out." Too glib, as though pulling out one's hair was a natural consequence of depression. And can this literally be true, whatever the source says? A little more detail, perhaps?

It is literally true, but I'll reword it.

• Mention of "post-doctoral studies", but no details given of when and where his doctorate was awarded. I imagine the University of California was involved, because of the plaque, but this needs to be made specific.
• When did he go to Japan? (This whole section is very short on dates, which makes the narrative hard to follow).
• "evacuated near the end of May" - year?
• "Beginning June 2" - year?
• "reaching 2.5 miles" - does this mean travelling a distance of 2.5 miles?
• There's an awkward double use of "remains" towards the end of the section, with distinctly differing meanings. You should find an alternative for one of them, e.g. "Glicken's body"

Volcanic landslide work

• The quotation in the box seems very long; quote boxes should be illustrative rather than exhaustive. You should consider paraphrasing some of this material and incorporating into the text.
• It would be better to begin the section with "One of the foremost experts...", and to re-site the present opening sentence at the end of the first paragraph, preferably with a summary of the dissertation's title. As mentioned earlier, there is some lack of clarity about when and where he studied for his doctorate.
• Second paragraph: "Glicken's report is titled..." - but in the immediately preceding paragraph you refer to his reports on Mount St Helens in the plural: "...are considered the most complete in the field to date and were later published..."
• The report includes "previous publications including that of Barry Voight." - can you explain what is meant here? The rest of the paragraph covers only routine information and barely seems worth including.
• The third paragraph I found quite hard to follow; I wonder if there is too much detail here for the non-specialist reader?

Legacy

• There are tributes here, but no discernible "legacy"
• Maybe you should state earlier, somewhere, that Glicken's rockslide report on Mount St Helens was not published until 1996, five years after his death.

Personality

• I'm not sure that Glicken's personal choice of nickname is notable enough for inclusion. Maybe "he was considered a 'nut' " should be in more formal language. The (presumably) slang term "spacey" is quite unknown to me, and I don't think the examples of quirky behaviour are details for an encyclopedia.

A quick glance at the sources reveals no problems. Brianboulton (talk) 19:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Excellent. I have a lot to do. Thanks so much! ceranthor 21:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I actually found a little more material in the Fisher source, so I'll add that soon. ceranthor 22:10, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I thought the Google Books edition had everything I needed, but it turns out it doesn't. Once I sort out my Amazon account info, I'll get the book and find it. ceranthor 02:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)