Talk:MAUD Committee/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: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 10:54, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 10:54, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead and infobox;
    • Please introduce "Rudolf Peierls and Otto Robert Frisch"; nationality and profession.
      checkY Noted that they were refugee physicists. Nationality is tricky; Peierls was German, but a naturalised British citizen; Frisch was Austrian, but not yet nationalised. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • the potential military feasibility a nuclear bomb; I cant't get the flow I think you've missed something before "a nuclear bomb"
      checkY Added missing "of". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Use of Uranium for a Bomb" and "Use of Uranium as a source of power"; "B" in bomb is to be de-capitalized, or put on initial capitals for "source of power"
      While I agree that the capitalisation makes no sense, that's the way it appears in the actual titles. [1][2] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why was it called MAUD Committee? What is the abbreviation of MAUD?
      checkY Added to the lead. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can infobox be added?
      Which one do you have in mind? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1;
    • Link Rome
      checkY Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • John A.Wheeler -> John A. Wheeler
      checkY Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • if he were was able
      checkY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Use conversion template for "5 kilogram" "one kilogram"
      Normally a precious metal would be converted into troy ounces, but the Imperial/US customary unit for fissile materials is kilograms. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Frisch and Peierls produced the Frisch–Peierls memorandum in March 1940; please brief of the contents in a line or two
      "They reported that a five kilogram bomb would be the equivalent to several thousand tons of dynamite, and even a one kilogram bomb would be impressive. Because of the potential radioactive fallout, they thought that the British might find it morally unacceptable." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More to come. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 08:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2;
    • A Committee was created; Why is "C" capitalized?
      checkY No good reason. De-capitalised. Hawkeye7 (discuss)
    • It held its first meeting on 10 April 1940 -> The first meeting was held on 10 April 1940
      Why use the passive? People usually want me to remove it, not put it in. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • in the ground floor main committee room; Do you think that this detail is necessary?
      Yes; it is remarked on in many accounts. Someone doing a tour can view the actual place. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • y with an i -> "y" with an "i"; to make it clear
      checkY Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • British born scientist; I think it is to be "scientists"
      checkY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Its meeting were; "meetings" or "meeting was"?
      checkY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:39, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 3; Very-well written
  • Section 4;
    • conversion for 1,800 tons
      This is part of a quote, so I don't want to do that. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • conversion for 1 kg
      Again, there is no conversion for fissile materials. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:07, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5;
    • to the president; isn't capital needed for "p"?
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • His report was issued "on" 17 May 1941
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • a talented an experimentalist
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • 25 million dollars -? US$25 million
      Again, it is part of a quote, so I don't want to change it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      The official exchange rate was $4.03 = £1, so about £6 million. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Britain did not have the money or the manpower -> Britain neither had the money nor the manpower; please ignore if the bit was said by Allison
      Part of a quote. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Link "James B. Conant"; James Bryant Conant
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • its atomic spies Klaus Fuchs; lastname
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lavrenty Beria's report to Stalin of March 1942; Mention "Stalin" in full, and link, as it is the first mention
       Done = Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • with the deliberately misleading name of Tube Alloys; to mislead who, the enemies, or for security purposes?
      checkY For security purposes, Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Imperial Chemical Industries"; already defined in the last para of section 2
      checkY Unlinked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • 58.1% confidence, violation likely. But I understand that it is mainly due to the quotation, so no issues.
  • Images; Create proper sections for description and licensing of File:Sir_Mark_Oliphant.jpg, File:MAUD_Report.jpg
  • No dabs found, external link OK.
Loved reading the article. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your review. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 08:40, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:MAUD_Committee/GA1&oldid=818220366"