Talk:Vera Rubin/GA1

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

Reviewer: Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) 13:46, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I'll review this one over the next couple of days. At first glance it looks fairly solid, I expect my comments to be minor. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 13:46, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I look forward to your comments! Keilana (talk) 17:11, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that's all I have for now; nice work, I enjoyed reading it. Vanamonde (talk) 06:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Checklist
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * All issues have been addressed
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * All issues fixed
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * Formatting issue fixed
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * One questionable source removed
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * All material appropriately cited.
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * Earwig's tool only flags the publication titles
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * Article is comprehensive.
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * No extraneous material
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * Minor wording issues have now been fixed
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * Stable.
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * Image licensing checks out to the best of my abilities.
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * No issues
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thanks to, all my points have been addressed, so I'm now happy to pass this. Vanamonde (talk) 05:44, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments

 * Feel free to revert any of my copyediting if I unintentionally change the meaning.
 * "inspired by Maria Mitchell's professorship there" I find this phrase a bit strange; perhaps "...undergraduate degree at Vassar college: Rubin felt inspired by Maria Mitchell, who had been a professor there" which is clearer with respect to the timeline, and the fact that the inspiration derived from Mitchell, and not her employment. ✅
 * Vassar was still an all-women college then, was it not? Worth mentioning? ✅
 * You mention her husband in "education" but he isn't introduced by name until much later; maybe just say "her husband arthur rubin", and that way nothing has to change later. ✅
 * "deviations from Hubble flow" Afraid most laypeople, including myself, do not know what that means. ✅
 * "one of the first observations of deviations from Hubble flow in the motions of 109 galaxies" Juxtaposition of "one of the first" and "109" sounds strange. Maybe "while studying the motions of 109 galaxies, Rubin made one of the first observations of.." or something to that effect. ✅
 * "This data" I'm not sure whether we should use the older convention that "data" is the plural form, or the recent convention of treating it as singular. ✅
 * Rather unfortunate that Supergalactic coordinate system makes no mention of Rubin... ✅ (added Rubin to the article)
 * "because women were not allowed in that area of the university." Yikes!
 * Should "Staff Member" be capitalized? Was it an official title? ✅
 * "she observed the rotation of galaxies for the first time" Was this her first observation of galactic rotation, or the first observation?
 * "tacit rule that women were not allowed" not allowed to what? Observe? Enter the building? Apply? ✅
 * "amplify starlight and view astronomical objects that were previously too dim to see." Isn't that pretty much any telescope, though? What's special about this one? ✅
 * link or explain "dark matter haloes." ✅
 * "perspective on the history of the work" what work? ✅
 * I'm not a fan of one sentence paragraphs. Could the NAS sentence be merged somewhere? It might even fit better in "legacy". Moved ✅
 * "pursue their dreams of investigating the universe" somewhat heavy journalistic voice, IMO (small rewrite) ✅
 * I'm not the biggest fan of either one-sentence sections, and I've developed a recent dislike of bulleted lists of awards; they make the page read too much like a resume. At the very least, can we merge "In popular culture" into the legacy, make "awards" a subsection of the same? Also, I won't insist on dealing with the list here, but possibly remove the honor already mentioned, and phrase it as "Rubin received many other awards..." etc etc. ✅
 * Some minor source issues: you have countries in the "location" for some source but not others, and I think it ought to be standardized; too often we give only non-US countries.
 * Not all the sources have an accessdate. ✅
 * Finally, I don't think the undergrad thesis should be here, especially as you have many refs for that already. removed ✅
 * Totally optional comment: may be nice to have an image of a galaxy in there somewhere; Andromeda, perhaps, with a comment about Rubin studying it.
 * Okay, hi, I'm sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you, I promise I haven't forgotten about this! I have an exam in an hour and a half and once that's taken care of I will turn my attention to Dr. Rubin. Keilana (talk) 16:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries. I thought it must be something along those lines, given that you weren't active. Good luck with the exam. Vanamonde (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)