Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Project Y/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2017 [1].

Project Y

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the best known part of the Manhattan Project: the Los Alamos Laboratory and the effort to design the first atomic bombs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Suggest scaling up the site maps. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have increased the size of the main map, and have added a new map of the Tech Area. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Comments~~ by Sturmvogel_66

No significant duplicate links due to the article's length.
plutonium had unexpected properties but were comma after properties
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
University of California in Berkeley, in July 1942 Already know the year
Y Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Link boiler
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lieutenant Colonel John M. Harman arrived on 19 January 1943; he was promoted to colonel on 15 February, and moved to Los Alamos on 19 April.[75] Los Alamos officially became a military establishment on 1 April 1943, with Harman as its first commander. The chronology here appears to be messed up. Where did he arrive on 19 Jan? And tell the reader why he's important in the first sentence.
Y We can have the chronological order or the first sentence.
the ratio of ν for uranium-235 What's "v"?
Y Neutrons per fission. There originally was a a formula in the article that I thought the reader might have fun deriving, but I took it out. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It was decided to use a type of radio altimeter known as the 718, but when the manufacturer, RCA, was contacted, it was learned that a new tail warning radar, AN/APS-13, known as Archie, was entering production. This was found to be suitable for use with Thin Man. Combine these two sentences and explain why a tail-warning radar was suitable for use as a radio altimeter.
Y Combined the sentences. Added a bit more about the radar. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
a small casting plant was established Tell the reader what it cast.
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Two new groups were created at Los Alamos to develop the implosion weapon, X (for explosives) Division headed by Kistiakowsky and G (for gadget) Division under Robert Bacher.[143][144] Although Teller was head of the T-1 (Implosion and Super) Group, Bethe considered that Teller was spending too much time on the Super, which had been given a low priority by Bethe and Oppenheimer. In June 1944, Oppenheimer created a dedicated Super Group under Teller, who was made directly responsible to Oppenheimer, and Peierls became head of the T-1 (Implosion) Group.[145][146] In September 1943, Teller's group became the F-1 (Super and General Theory) Group, part of the Enrico Fermi's new F (Fermi) Division. the chronology here is confusing, or there are some typos for years. But either way...
Y Typo. It was in September 1944. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Henceforth the gun-type had to work with enriched uranium only, and this allowed the Thin Man design to be greatly simplified. A high-velocity gun was no longer required, and a simpler weapon could be substituted, one short enough to fit into a B-29 bomb bay. Do you mean Little Boy here?
Y Yes. Heh, forgot to mention that. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
allow the powder bags clarify, do you mean the bags of propellant for the gun mechanism?
Y Yes. Added that. It must have seemed an obvious approach to a navy ordnance man like Parsons. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fat Man assembly, known as F13 don't you mean a pre-assembly?
Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Phew!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Reviewing these A-Class articles, especially those written by the nominator, can be frustrating because there is little to offer apart from admiration. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this highly informative contribution. I was astounded to learn how many people were employed there. I thought "authorities" was vague and I recall a "refused", which might be better as "rejected", (no big deal). There's a lot of redirects, mainly the names of the individuals; fixing them would add a little more shine to this fabulous article. Graham Beards (talk) 10:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review! I have elaborated on the British bureaucratic process. And changed "refused" to "rejected". Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I went over this at the A-class review and I remain impressed. My only concern is the length. The average reader is going to struggle with an article of nearly 13,000 words. If any of the information can be split into daughter articles, I would urge that this be done, but I have no concerns about the content itself. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note: Unless I have missed it, I think this just needs a source review. One can be added in the usual place. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Formatting for dates, archive dates, and retrieved dates need consistency (see fn 1 and fn 233 for example)
Y Corrected. (FN 1 required a special card) Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In the Serber & Rhodes entry, University of California Press is wikilinked but you haven't linked others that have articles (like Oxford University Press). Need consistency.
Y Removed the Wikilinks. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No other issues noted. --Laser brain (talk) 00:16, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Sarastro1 (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.