Talk:Marvin Pipkin

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Marvin Pipkin. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110521200204/http://fpc.dos.state.fl.us/memory/Collections/WWI/card.cfm?intOurDocID=21959 to http://fpc.dos.state.fl.us/memory/Collections/WWI/card.cfm?intOurDocID=21959

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:25, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Hi ChromeGames923 and Aréat, I was editing this page while you did your edits, and I messed up the edit conflict resolution. I think I've now included all your edtis, but please check! --Slashme (talk) 06:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 05:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll review this as it's one of the oldest nominations. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

1. GACR#1a. Well written: the prose is clear, concise and understandable.
2. GACR#1a. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
3. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
4. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
5. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
6. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
7. GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation.
8. GACR#2a. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
9. GACR#2b. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
10. GACR#2b. All inline citations are from reliable sources.
11. GACR#2b. All quotations are cited and their usage complies with MOS guidelines.
12. GACR#2c. No original research.
13. GACR#2d. No copyright violations or plagiarism.
14. GACR#3. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
15. GACR#4. Neutral (NPOV).
16. GACR#5. Stable.
17. GACR#6a. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.
18. GACR#6b. Images are relevant to the topic with appropriate captions.

I'll use the checklist above to measure progress. The article is stable and its images are either fair use or PD, so I'm passing GACR#5&6. Back later. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

On hold

I'm putting the review on hold because some work is needed before I can proceed with a detailed review. There are two major concerns.

First is a lack of linkage, immediately apparent in the lead section, as there are numerous terms and names in the article that should be wikilinked. Some examples are:

• In the lead – chemist, engineer, scientist, United States Army, gas mask, World War I, diffuse and General Electric.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

• In the narrative – citrus grove, chemistry, prospecting, Chemical Engineering, fertilizer, master's degree, doctorate, Army, Jacksonville, chemical weapon, World War I, gas mask, etc.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Note that if a term like "gas mask" is linked in the lead, it needs to be linked again on first use in the narrative. You need to work through the article and find all such terms and names where a link would be useful to a reader.

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The second major concern is the U.S. patents section which consists of direct links to pdf downloads. While some readers may be happy to receive a download, I think the vast majority will prefer a description of the patent followed by an inline citation to a secondary source as per WP:CITE. I mention secondary because I would question the validity of these pdf on the grounds of WP:PRIMARY. See WP:PATENTS, Template:Patent and Template:Cite patent which should help.

• @No Great Shaker: I am now converting all the PDFs in U.S. Patents to journal cites with links. I am half done and it will take me another day to finish this up. Meanwhile, if you have time - can you look over what I have done so far and perhaps continue with the review. Then we both can be finished up at the same time, with no loss in time. Perhaps we could wrap this up by tomorrow (Oct 31). Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:05, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll leave the review on hold for seven days. No Great Shaker (talk) 07:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

•  Working Thanks for initial review. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
• @No Great Shaker: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:30, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Doug, I'll try and look at it again over the weekend but not sure about availability. Should be okay to do it in the next few days, though. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:21, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Passes GA

Hello again, Doug, and I'm pleased to say that this now meets the criteria above so I'm promoting to GA. The frosted light bulb is one of those things we all just take for granted but obviously someone somewhere invented it. Well done. All the best and keep safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:19, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Incidental destruction of a practical joke

I think it might be worth noting that Pipkin's invention of internally frosted lightbulbs incidentally killed off one of the many forms of fool's errand to which newcomers in some workplaces are subjected (being told to go buy some 'blinker fluid' is one classic example). Before Pipkin's invention, a 'lightbulb frosted on the interior' (and different wordings of the same concept) was evidently one of the nonexistent items that the victim of such a prank might be asked to procure. In fact, at present, the article for "Fool's errand" not only notes this detail but features a picture of one of the bulbs that Pipkin made possible. Moreover, the wording of that picture's caption ("...was once thought to be impossible") indirectly highlights Pipkin's achievement in bringing an item previously confined to the realm of the hilariously unreal (like a left-handed screwdriver) into the real world.

One of the references presently utilized by this article (as I write this, it is #7) observed the same thing long before me: "The Joke that turned," in 'The Iola Register', published August 6, 1945.

I therefore propose that this fact be given its due in the appropriate section. As I am not yet comfortable writing brand-new prose for this encyclopedia, I have made this suggestion in the Talk page in the hope that a more experienced user might undertake that addition.

Nieuwe Nederlander (talk) 06:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

What is your encyclopediac purpose here? How is this about the subject of the article? What value will the reader get from this? --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

was it really a fool's errand / practical joke?

The two references for this fact look very dubious to me. One is a 1945 newspaper column (written as a "piece of advice" column rather than serious research). The other is a book of 150 biographies, which looks like a book of 150 little anecdotes rather than a serious biography. I would like to see much better quality references, or I think I will mark those references as dubious. Adpete (talk) 03:19, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

OK, the Popular Science reference later in the article [1] is much better, and even has quotes from Pipkin himself. While it does say his bosses "smiled indulgently" when he suggested researching, and some people wanted him to work on something "more practical", I see nothing there indicating it was a practical joke on him. I'm calling "urban myth" on the fool's errand assertion, and suggest removing it. Adpete (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

This sort of issue is found throughout the WP:DCGAR content; best advice is to remove as you see fit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)