Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Robert Bacher

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promoted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Bacher edit

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

Next in the long line of Manhattan Project articles. Unless someone else comes to the party, this will take years. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:20, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I did some minor copy editing, please check you are happy with my changes. Overall, I believe that this article meets A-class standards. I have a couple of minor comments about the images:

"File:Robert F. Bacher.GIF": the image description page currently says "Date: 22 March 2013, 21:42:17", but shouldn't it be the date that the image was taken?
"File:Bacher, Lilienthal, Pike, Waymack and Strauss.jpg" as above, this says "Date: 26 March 2013, 07:21:06", but shouldn't it be the date the image was taken?
"File:Jean Dow Bacher Los Alamos ID.png", probably needs a date of creation if you have one;
"File:Robert Bacher ID badge.png" as above. AustralianRupert (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~Support by Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

a couple of images need alt text [1]
all other toolbox checks are green (dab, ext links, reflinks, redirects, earwig, and no overlinking) (no action required)
suggest "and his wife Jean" in the lead
what does "visitor" mean with respect to Edward Condon?
suggest you actually mention Teller by name instead of just a reference to the "Super" bomb
"200 inches" doesn't really work, it should be 200 inch IMO
suggest "his wife Jean ~~had~~having died"
- All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~Support
- Technical review has been done above (no action req'd).
- This doesn't quite sound correctly worded to me: "...on the Zeeman effect of hyperfine structure of atomic levels...". Not really sure what may / may not be wrong with it though (not understanding the physics aspects of the article I'm not sure of the correct terminology). Is it missing a plural somewhere? It just seems awkward to me (also repeated in body of the text). Would this work better: "...the Zeeman effect on the hyperfine structure of atomic levels..."?
  - Yes, there was a missing word. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Missing word here: "...Bacher moved back to Ann Arbor, where lived at home..."
  - Another missing word. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Otherwise fine. Anotherclown (talk) 22:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Added my support now. Anotherclown (talk) 01:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.