Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Isidor Isaac Rabi


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * Promoted AustralianRupert (talk) 08:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Isidor Isaac Rabi

 * Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

Another mad scientist. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Quick comments
 * Some overlinking - for example, Galicia twice in the lead
 * File:II_Rabi.jpg: what's the difference between a "photographic picture" and a "photographic work"? Either way, also need US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sweden draws a distinction between photographs that are fine art and those that are purely illustrative. I'm not pretending to be an expert on Swedish copyright law; but this is clearly in the latter camp. So Swedish copyright expired in 1994. I've added one of those URAA notices. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No doubt that the image falls into the latter category, but I'm still unsure whether the template is actually correct. On the talk it is suggested for "pictures" Life+70 must instead apply because of the EU directive; however, nobody has yet questioned whether that directive affected "works". Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Support from Crisco 1492. A couple comments further down which may or may not need to be resolved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:06, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


 * "After the war, he served on the General Advisory Committee (GAC) of the Atomic Energy Commission, of which he was chairman from 1952 to 1956, on the Science Advisory Committee (SAC) of the Office of Defense Mobilization, and was Science Advisor to President Dwight D. Eisenhower." - I note that you have "of which he was chairman..." which is not part of the list of locations. Perhaps a way to better indicate this? I was thinking ndashes.
 * Broke the sentence in two. Hawkeye7 (talk)
 * In order to be near her when she returned home, Rabi continued his studies at Columbia University... - Were they already dating / in love / involved / whatever?
 * Yes. Added that they were involved. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note speciality is BrE. Rabi was mainly active in the US, so I've changed it to specialty
 * Unfortunately... - According to? This is a judgement call.
 * Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Work was being conducted with non-uniform magnetic fields, which were difficult to work with ..." - work ... work
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Rabi managed to get his idea to work. - Get his idea to work sounds rather colloquial.
 * Not sure how to word tyhis one better. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "successfully apply"...? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)


 * More tomorrow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)


 * "Helen was now pregnant, and Rabi needed a regular job, and this job was in New York." - That's a lot of "and"s
 * Split sentence in two. Hawkeye7 (talk)
 * "It remained to do so. " - It didn't happen yet? Perhaps ", something which had not yet been achieved".
 * No, no. The theoretical physicists make predictions, and then the experimentalists devise an experiment to validate the prediction. Or that's how it used to work. The two haven't been on speaking terms for the last two decades. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I like your new phrasing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * the paragraph starting with "Rabi's Molecular Beam Laboratory began to attract others, including Sidney Millman," looks to lack correlation. What's the relevance of heavy water? What's the relevance of Deuterium?
 * It seems firly obvious to me, but I've added a few words of explanation for the non-technical reader. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "producing a microwave radar set by January 6," - 1941...?
 * 1941. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "elder statesman of physics" - This is not literal (President of the Quark?) so it should be attributed to someone and quoted.
 * Maybe if I had my books. Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * "Rabi later testified on Oppenheimer's behalf at a controversial Atomic Energy Commission Oppenheimer security hearing in 1954 that ultimately led to Oppenheimer's being stripped of his security clearance. Many witnesses supported Oppenheimer, but none more forcefully than Rabi" - Why was Oppenheimer on trial?
 * He wasn't on trial; it was just a security hearing. It's long and involved enough to have its own article, a subarticle of the Oppenheimer article. The readers who want to knwo will just have to read it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a small note, like "over alleged communist sympathies" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The paragraph starting "Rabi chaired Columbia's physics department" seems to jump all over the place, from Rabi's death back to 1952.
 * No it doesn't; it follows his academic career in chronological order.
 * Admittedly so, but it's jolting to go from "death" to "1952". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Riverside Drive - Perhaps note again that this is in New York
 * Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The paragraph starting with "In the course of his life, Rabi received many honors in addition to the Nobel Prize." reads like pure proseline — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * hang him out to dry. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Support with minor comments: Hchc2009 (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Enjoyed reading it.
 * " since at the time Jews were largely excluded from jobs in the chemical industry and academia, he did not receive any job offers" - repetition of "job"; first mention could be "employment in the chemical industry"?
 * Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "They became involved, and in order to be near her when she returned home" - "involved" is a little vague - it presumably means they entered into a romantic relationship?
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "The paper had little impact, " - unclear if this meant it was published, and had little impact with the academic community, or was just ignored by the journal.
 * In the academia. Added a bit. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "This came with a $1,500 stipend for the period from September 1927 to June 1928. " - a contemporary figure or equivalent sum would make clear if this was a good or a bad stipend.
 * Added an inflation template. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "Others working with Sommerfeld at the time included Rudolf Peierls and Hans Bethe; but the three Americans became especially close" - the contrasting "but" didn't quite work for me here.
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk)
 * "Rabi's education in physics was influenced and enriched " - "influenced and enriched" felt duplicative to me (e.g. I suspect "enriched" would be enough on its own)
 * Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * "might be a model that Europeans could profitably emulate." - do you mean profitably literally, or would "usefully" be a better word?
 * Dropped the adverb. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments Support
 * No dab links (no action required).
 * External links checker reveals one issue :
 * Public Welfare Award (info) [nasonline.org) [Dead since 2012-08-17]
 * They moved it. Repaired link. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Images lack Alt Text so you might consider adding it (suggestion only - not an ACR requirement).
 * The Citation Check Tool reveals no errors with reference consolidation (no action required).
 * Images are all public domain or licensed and seem appropriate to the article (no action required).
 * The Earwig Tool reveals no issues with copyright violations (no action required).
 * "This came with a $1,500 ($20069 as of 2012)...", probably should be "$20,069" per WP:MOSNUM.
 * Formatted with yet another template. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This is repeatitive: "a fellow American, Robert Oppenheimer, a fellow New Yorker." Perhaps: "a fellow American, Robert Oppenheimer, also from New York..." or something similar.
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This seems chronologically out of place to me: "He subsequently became a professor in 1937..." (as your next paragraph begins "In 1931 Rabi returned to particle beam experiments.") Perhaps move to a later paragraph (suggestion only)?
 * "Deuterium isotope had only recently been discovered at Columbia in 1931 by Harold Urey...", should just be Urey as he has already been introduced earlier per WP:SURNAME.
 * Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This sentence seems a little obtuse: "The scientists working on Trinity set up a betting pool for the results of the test, with predictions ranging from total dud to 45 kilotons of TNT equivalent (KT)." The implication is that you are refering to the yield of the weapon but I'm not sure that would be clear to a 12-year old. I wonder if it should be clarified (suggestion only)?
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This seems awkward: "Rabi later testified on Oppenheimer's behalf at a controversial Atomic Energy Commission Oppenheimer security hearing...", almost like "Oppenheimer security hearing" is being used as a noun. Would this work better: "Rabi later testified on Oppenheimer's behalf at a controversial Atomic Energy Commission security hearing "?
 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Overall, this article is clearly of high quality. Only a couple of minor points to discuss / deal with. Anotherclown (talk) 04:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * My points have been dealt with. Anotherclown (talk) 09:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.