Talk:James McCormack/GA1

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 11:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 11:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * I made a few tweaks and added a lit bit on his early education and early military career. Please check these edits and adjust as you see fit;
 * Looks good. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * images lack alt text (not a GA requirement, just a suggestion);
 * Added. Hawkeye7 (talk)
 * in the lead, "He took a pragmatic approach to the issue of the proper agency" - would this work: "He took a pragmatic approach to resolving the issue of the proper agency?
 * I don't know if I'd go so far as to say "resolved". See what you think of the new wording. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * in the lead, "a non-profit research organization to provide advice and support to the Department of Defense's scientific and technological research efforts formed by ten universities". Would this work: "a non-profit research organization established to provide advice and support to the Department of Defense's scientific and technological research efforts formed by ten universities"?
 * Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * in the Early life section, do we know who his parents were or if he had any siblings?
 * No. It took an extraordinary effort to find his wife and kids. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I understand. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "and took a pragmatic approach to the custody issue" - this seems a little unclear. In what way was it pragmatic and which agency did he support to maintain custody?
 * Rewrote this. See if it is clearer now. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, that looks good. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * this sentence is a little awkward: "This was despite the fact that, even after Operation Greenhouse, the processes involved in thermonuclear reactions were not fully understood, and the Super design might never work."
 * Rewrote this too. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "McCormack transferred to the United States Air Force on 25 July 1950". Do we know why?
 * Not for sure. At the time it was possible for Army and Navy officers to voluntarily transfer. I believe - but cannot prove - that the Super controversy made his career in the Army problematic. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "He was called to testify at the Oppenheimer security hearing". Do we know whether or not he believed that Oppenheimer was a security risk, or what he said at the hearing?
 * Yes! Added a bit more. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that looks good. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "McCormack died at his winter home". Do we know what he died from? AustralianRupert (talk) 12:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No worries. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Technical review
 * a (Disambiguations): b (Linkrot)  c (Alt text)  d (Copyright)
 * no dabs found by the tools.
 * one external link reports as dead, but it is not a warstoper:
 * alt text is present;
 * spot checks of online sources revealed no copyright violations. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Criteria
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:


 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * Looks good, congratulations on another GA. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)