Talk:Ernest Lawrence/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jamesx12345 (talk · contribs) 20:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to review this over the weekend. Jamesx12345 20:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "1939 for his invention of the cyclotron atom-smasher" - is "atom smasher" colloquial? I've always thought it is, and if that is the case, it is probably redundant.
 * ✅ Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "and two years later became the youngest full professor at the University of California" - "becoming the youngest full professor there two years later."
 * ✅ Good idea. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence was intrigued by a diagram of a device to" - this is very abrupt - could it be started, "Whilst at..., Lawrence was intrigued"
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "high-energy particles and pondered how to make the accelerator more compact. He created a circular accelerating chamber" - "high-energy particles. Contemplating how to make the accelerator more compact..."
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "the cyclotron" - "the first cyclotron"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Radiation Laboratory should be linked
 * It's already linked in the lead as Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * A ref in the intro for his support of Teller would be good (obviously pretty contentious.)
 * ✅ Easily done, but I wouldn't have thought it was contentious. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've always thought that the Teller/Oppenheimer caused massive divisions - that's not quite the same, though.


 * "after his first year.[2] Lawrence completed" - "after his first year.[2] He completed"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Instead of using it to travel to Europe, remained at Yale University with Swann as a researcher" - missing "he"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Two sentences with "They showed" could probably be run together.
 * ✅ Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "people who were unimpressed" - "who were" can be removed.
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * In 1928, Lawrence... - this paragraph needs references for his membership being sponsored and meeting people there.
 * There is already a reference. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence named his son Robert after J. Robert Oppenheimer, his closest friend at Berkeley"
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence saw that such..." - needs a few more references.
 * There is already a reference. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "to do the work." - needs a ref (even if it is a self-evident truth.)
 * There is already a reference. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hiring good people and paying them little or nothing would prove to be a sound business model." - likewise
 * There is already a reference. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "able to accelerate ions to 1 MV." - is that 1 MeV?
 * ✅ yes. Thanks for that one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "more than enough for his PhD thesis." - this could be expanded, even just to say "more than enough to obtain the results he needed for his PhD thesis."
 * ✅ No, the construction of a cyclotron was the subject of his thesis. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "as soon as there was the first signs of success" - should signs be singular?
 * ✅ Um, okay. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Added space to $800 11-inch
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence found an 80-ton magnet" - "The magnet for the $800 11-inch cyclotron weighed 2 tons, and the magnet for the 27-inch one weighed 80 tons." - removes the possibility that he stumbled across 80 tons of magnet.
 * No, he stumbled across 80-tons of magnet. It was used by the Navy for something. I'll have to expand this, but haven't got the book on hand here. Please give me a few days. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This link is from the American Institute of Physics, so definitely satisfies RS.

Extremely readable article, coming from here in just a month. I'm surprised by the chattiness of the prose in some parts, but on reflection, I think it prevents it from being unreadably dry. Jamesx12345 21:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "well within the capability of the 11-inch cyclotron." - ref needed
 * There is already a reference. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Something of a contradiction between the paragraph beginning "Through his increasingly..." and the previous one. Perhaps "this did not translate immediately into scientific discovery" would make more sense?
 * ✅ re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "but they had overlooked another important discovery." - it would be nice to know what!
 * ✅ Fusion. I thought is was obvious, but tried to make it clear. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "He the first at Berkeley to become a Nobel Laureate, and the first ever to be so honored while at a state-supported university." - a bit more concise
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "campus of the university with Lawrence receiving" - "campus of the university, with Lawrence receiving" - add a comma
 * ✅ Decided to split the long sentence instead., Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "After the outbreak of World War II in Europe..." - ref for recruiting and security reasons.
 * There is already a reference in the paragraph. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Added space to "submarines. Meanwhile"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Oliphant met with Lawrence at Oppenheimer at Berkeley" - I assume that is "Lawrence and Oppenheimer"?
 * ✅ Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence had already thought about the problem of uranium enrichment, for only the uranium-235 isotope is fissile." - "Lawrence had already thought about the problem of uranium enrichment, for only the uranium-235 isotope will undergo the fission reaction necessary to create a bomb" - or something like that
 * No, that is not correct. Fissile is what we want. Uranium 238 will fission in a high flux situation, and was used as a tamper. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "One way of separating the isotopes was with a mass spectrometer, so Lawrence began converting his old 37-inch cyclotron into a giant mass spectrometer" - "One of the proposed ways of separating the isotopes was with a mass spectrometer, so Lawrence began converting his old 37-inch cyclotron for that purpose."
 * No, that is not correct. It wasn't a proposed way; it was already known to work. But it only produced small quantities, and could not be used on an industrial scale. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "laboratory mass spectrometer and cyclotron" - "and the cyclotron"
 * ✅ Tried to make this clearer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "bolstered by twenty nine British scientists until Oliphant" - confusing meaning.
 * ✅ It should be "including Oliphant" Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "scientifically elegant" - according to whom? I know Feynman hated it.
 * ✅ Probably for this reason. Gaseous diffusion was a better solution, but no one knew how to get it to work. Basically, the technology risk in the electromagnetic method was low. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Stone & Webster can be linked. (A reference for their building it would also be nice)
 * The paragraph is already referenced. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "and had to be fastened more securely." - needs a ref (I can only imagine what would happen to all the computers...)
 * The paragraph is already referenced. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "demonstration would be wise" - also needs a ref
 * The paragraph is already referenced. The article is fully referenced. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "requirements for big machines and big money" - "costly apparatus and large teams of experimenters" Some references for this paragraph as well would be good.
 * The paragraph is already referenced. The article is fully referenced. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "a new linear accelerator and a new billion electron volt synchrotron which became known at the bevatron" - "a new linear accelerator and a billion electron volt synchrotron which later became known at the bevatron"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk)
 * "The major obstacle was the contracts due to expire on July 1, 1948" - confusing again
 * ✅ Expanded on this. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "The 184-inch was completed" - "The 184-inch cyclotron was completed"
 * ✅ Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "pi meson" - "pion" - more common name
 * But anachronistic. It was not yet called that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "Lawrence banned Robert Oppenheimer's brother" - is "banned" the most appropriate word here. It's hard to tell if he was forced to leave or not allowed to take up a position.
 * He wasn't allowed in the building. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "which had commenced operation." - ref
 * The paragraph is already referenced. The article is fully referenced. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * "For his service to his country" - "For service to his country"
 * No, the first form is better. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there a link for the proposed treaty?
 * Not that I know of. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I assume he died of colitis? It would be good just to make that absolutely clear.
 * Sort of. I will expand this.
 * ✅ Done. Some readers might find it a bit TMI though, especially if they click on the links. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you're your own derivative, you must be ex. Just saying. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I've always thought that "jams" must be 1, even without a satisfactory numerological explanation, and some brackets. I'll probably remove that tragic experiment in html anyway, and promote the article now. Good work again. Jamesx12345 11:28, 22 September 2013 (UTC)