Wikipedia:Peer review/Big Bang/archive1

Big Bang
Hi, I'd like to know if there are any comments on how to get this article to feature article status. In particular, is the style well-done, are there any ambiguity issues, does it read well, etc. I would nominate it for fas right now, but I'm concerned that there may be some issues I overlooked. Joshuaschroeder 02:14, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Pretty good, but I feel that a reorganisation may help it read better. IMHO, I think that the "Theoretical underpinnings" section should appear after "Descriptive Overview", which in turn should appear after "History of the theory".  JYolkowski 03:17, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree. This edit has been done. Joshuaschroeder 08:25, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I think that there are some places where the article could be made a little more unambiguous, but whatever tweaking needs to be done before an FA nomination will be quite small. By the way, I think that Stephen Hawking says in A Brief History of Time (ISBN 0553380168) that he proved a theorem whereby, if the assumptions of General Relativity are correct, the Universe must have began as predicted by the Big Bang theory.   &rarr;I&ntilde;g&#333;lemo&larr;  (talk) 05:33, 2005 Jan 31 (UTC)
 * Well, Hawking makes some outlandish claims from time to time, but I hope this isn't one of them. It was Friedman who proved that if certain assumptions of GR are correct that they lead to an expanding (or contracting) universe. Hawking at one time thought that we would perceive the contracting universe the same way as the expanding one, but it turns out that the enthropic arrow of time does not magically reverse itself at the rebound point before the Big Crunch in a closed universe. Joshuaschroeder 07:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I have made the FA nomination for the page. Thanks for all your help! Joshuaschroeder 07:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)