Talk:James McCormack/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 11:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• I made a few tweaks and added a lit bit on his early education and early military career. Please check these edits and adjust as you see fit;
  • Looks good. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• images lack alt text (not a GA requirement, just a suggestion);
  • Added. Hawkeye7 (talk)
• in the lead, "He took a pragmatic approach to the issue of the proper agency" - would this work: "He took a pragmatic approach to resolving the issue of the proper agency?
  • I don't know if I'd go so far as to say "resolved". See what you think of the new wording. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• in the lead, "a non-profit research organization to provide advice and support to the Department of Defense's scientific and technological research efforts formed by ten universities". Would this work: "a non-profit research organization established to provide advice and support to the Department of Defense's scientific and technological research efforts formed by ten universities"?
  • Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• in the Early life section, do we know who his parents were or if he had any siblings?
  • No. It took an extraordinary effort to find his wife and kids. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
    • That's fine, I understand. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• "and took a pragmatic approach to the custody issue" - this seems a little unclear. In what way was it pragmatic and which agency did he support to maintain custody?
  • Rewrote this. See if it is clearer now. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Yes, that looks good. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• this sentence is a little awkward: "This was despite the fact that, even after Operation Greenhouse, the processes involved in thermonuclear reactions were not fully understood, and the Super design might never work."
  • Rewrote this too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• "McCormack transferred to the United States Air Force on 25 July 1950". Do we know why?
  • Not for sure. At the time it was possible for Army and Navy officers to voluntarily transfer. I believe - but cannot prove - that the Super controversy made his career in the Army problematic. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• "He was called to testify at the Oppenheimer security hearing". Do we know whether or not he believed that Oppenheimer was a security risk, or what he said at the hearing?
  • Yes! Added a bit more. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Thanks, that looks good. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
• "McCormack died at his winter home". Do we know what he died from? AustralianRupert (talk) 12:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
  • No. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
    • No worries. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Technical review

• a (Disambiguations): b (Linkrot) c (Alt text) d (Copyright)

• no dabs found by the tools.
• one external link reports as dead, but it is not a warstoper: [1]
• alt text is present;
• spot checks of online sources revealed no copyright violations. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• It is factually accurate and verifiable.

  a (references): 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.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

• It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

  a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

• Overall:

  a Pass/Fail:

• Looks good, congratulations on another GA. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)