A fact from J. Carson Mark appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 October 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
In one of the citations there's a bibcode error (easy to see if you ctrl+f it). I investigated and discovered that we're using an archived version of a source that can easily be accessed via the DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063%2F1.881942 In my opinion, this source should be updated by removing the current archive URL, replacing it, marking the link as not dead, and replacing the link with the new one that the DOI redirects to. Also: where is the bibcode listed? I don't see it. I'll leave this comment here and check back to see if any action has been taken. If no one opposes, I'll fix it myself (removing the bibcode field entirely). Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 10:26, 9 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
