Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rutherford scattering experiments/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14 August 2024 [1].

Rutherford scattering experiments

[edit]
Nominator(s): Kurzon (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the experiments by which Ernest Rutherford discovered that the atom has a nucleus.Kurzon (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the previous (unsuccessful) FAC was under a different title: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Geiger–Marsden experiments/archive1. RoySmith (talk) 16:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • There are multiple Figure 1s
  • Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods
  • File:Geiger-Marsden_apparatus_photo.jpg is tagged as if the replica is non-free - commons:COM:UA suggests the replica itself would be free, but the photo may be copyrighted. But is there a reason a non-free image is needed at all given the existence of File:Geiger-Marsden_apparatus_CGI_mock-up.png?
  • File:Ernest_Rutherford2.jpg: what is the original source? The tagging seems unlikely to be correct
  • File:Hans_geiger.jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
  • File:Ernest_Marsden_1921.jpg: when and where was this first published and what is its status in its country of origin?
  • File:GM-1909-1.gif: source link is dead. Ditto File:GM-1909-3.gif, File:Geiger-Marsden_diagram.gif

Oppose from Gog the Mild

[edit]

Recusing.

  • There are many uncited statements, which regrettably means that I have to oppose. The same flaw was pointed out at the last nomination, and I am at a loss to understand why it has not been corrected. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm obviously not going to suggest that this can be promoted with the sourcing deficiencies described above. But I do want to point out that in general it is a well written treatment of an important bit of physics history. The style of writing (at least the early parts before you get to all the math) makes this highly technical topic approachable to people without a strong technical background; an important aspect of our mission as a general-purpose encyclopedia per WP:TECHNICAL. At the same time, the treatment of hyperbolic trajectories is new to me and thus offers something for the more advanced reader. I'm familiar with this series of experiments, but the presentations I've seen only covered them as a stepping-stone to the more modern theories and glossed over these details. So you've got something of value to multiple audiences, which in itself is an accomplishment. All of this is just a roundabout way of encouraging you to fix the sourcing problems. Once that's taken care of, I'll be happy to come back and do a more detailed review. RoySmith (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- on Roy's encouraging note re. prose, I'm going to archive this so that sourcing issues can be dealt with outside the pressure of the FAC process; per FAC instructions, a two-week wait applies before re-nominating this or any other article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Rutherford_scattering_experiments/archive1&oldid=1240258607"