Talk:Esther Lederberg/GA1

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

Reviewer: Aussie Article Writer (talk · contribs) 04:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

 * , I have finished reviewing this article. It's a really excellent article, but it has gaps and I feel there is a bit that needs filling in, and I think there is still some material that needs covering for balance and neutrality. Can you address these concerns? Note that if you need me to send you material from the book I purchased (Women in Microbiology), I am happy to provide it. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 08:16, 18 July 2021 (UTC)


 * : Thank you for reviewing the article. I am busy with other things at the moment, but I will get to it on Wednesday. CatPath   meow at me  23:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 04:03, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * * hey, is this still something you are working on? - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 00:14, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I have to take a break from editing this week and early next week because I have final exams/projects due for a couple of summer classes I'm taking. I believe I addressed most of the issues, but I still need to work on the lead and mention the challenges Lederberg faced as a woman in science. I'll work on it next week. CatPath   meow at me  00:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * not a problem, let me review the changes. Take your time, there is no time limit on these things so long as you are going to actively work on the GAN. - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


 * , the original GA reviewer is no longer active on Wikipedia, unfortunately. I've agreed to pick up the review where he left off. When you return from your break and get the changes just like you want them, just ping me and we'll see what else, if anything, needs to be done for promotion to GA. Thanks for your work on the entry! Larry Hockett (Talk) 16:46, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's been more than a month…typically, when there have been more than seven days of inactivity, GAN's are closed to be reopened at a future date. I think you should fail this review and wait for to re-submit. This review has been going on since July. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * My apologies, but I should have pinged you earlier. I believe I have addressed all the concerns of the original reviewer. Am I supposed to give a point-by-point response to each concern? CatPath   meow at me  03:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , I apologize for letting this fall off my radar. I didn't intend to rely entirely on your ping to come back and check the progress. There is no need for a line-by-line reply to the feedback. I just need to verify that the feedback has been addressed. My home internet connection has been down this week and I have been restricted to editing from my phone, but tech support is coming out tomorrow. Once I can edit from my computer again, I'd like to take one more look for any outstanding issues. One thing I notice: Near the end of the Early Years section, there's a mention of Yale's Osborne Botanical Laboratory. Does this refer to a botanical lab at the Osborn Memorial Laboratories? If so, check the spelling and consider a link to our article. Larry Hockett (Talk) 07:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that. I removed the "e" at the end and wikilinked the lab name.  CatPath   meow at me  20:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Remaining concerns

 * "graduating at the age of 15" - the cited source says 16 - did this come from a different reference?
 * Lambda phage is mentioned in the opening of the second section in the body, but it is linked on the second mention rather than the first.
 * I'm wondering if the bullet points in the Professional Honors section would be better presented as prose. I also wasn't sure whether emeritus status is really considered a professional honor, but I won't hold up GA status for either of these issues.
 * Overall, I think the references are formatted pretty well, but I notice in the Professional Challenges section that the first source (a Stanford news piece) could be fleshed out a bit more - right now it's just the URL and title.
 * In the last paragraph of that section, I wonder if the link to second-wave feminism would be more helpful than the existing one to feminism.
 * Same section - Does "a drop in position" refer to a demotion?

I think that's all I have. I made a few minor edits myself. Larry Hockett (Talk) 02:53, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I have addressed most of the remaining concerns:
 * * She indeed graduated at the age of 15. The cited source was incorrect, so I replaced it with a different source that states her date of graduation.
 * * I linked the first mention of lambda phage and removed the link from the second mention.
 * * Regarding the Professional Honors section, I have to check other sources. I can't find any source that says Lederberg ever went to work in Australia with a Fulbright Fellowship. The source may be incorrect in that it may have been her husband that was awarded the Fellowship, not her - but I'll check further. I also can't find any source that says she was a "fellow" of AAAS, but I'll check further. I agree with you that her emeritus status is not really a professional honor. I will remove that one.
 * * I expanded the Stanford news piece citation.
 * * Yes, a "drop in position" refers to a demotion. I reworded the sentence.
 * CatPath  meow at me  23:41, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I have addressed all the concerns. I removed the "Professional Honors" section and moved the mention about the Pasteur Award under "Contributions to Microbiology and Genetics." The other honors listed in the section were either incorrect or insignificant. For example, AAAS awarded her a certificate for being a 50-year member of AAAS, which I don't think is worth mentioning in the article. She was not a "fellow" of AAAS, as the previous version of the article claimed. CatPath   meow at me  22:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)