Talk:Nuggehalli Raghuveer Moudgal

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nuggehalli Raghuveer Moudgal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130224074105/http://www.csir.res.in/External/Heads/career/award/BPRIZE/Medical_SCIENCES.htm to http://www.csir.res.in/external/heads/career/award/BPRIZE/Medical_SCIENCES.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nuggehalli Raghuveer Moudgal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 10:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll copyedit as I go; please revert if I make a mess of anything.

• You probably already know this, but citations in the lead are optional except for direct quotes and controversial material, so you could cut the first footnote if you wanted to.  Done --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Note 1 says "Long link - please select award year to see details": I don't understand what this is telling me to do. The link points to the first page and that's why I put a note there. Now I have removed the note" --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• I think we could expand the lead a little bit, perhaps to include some biographical information and some mention of his research.  Done --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• There are pictures of Crawford Hall that would be more suitable (i.e. without the distracting tree in front): see here.  Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Similarly see here for other pictures of IISc.  Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 11:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Can we get a link or an inline explanation for "superannuation"? I'm not sure what is meant here. Means retirement from official service. I have replaced the word. --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Later, at Rodney Porter's laboratory in London, he worked on cellulose as a carrier for immobilization of antibodies: this appears to be uncited; the following cite doesn't cover it. And why is the sentence partly in italics? I put those words in italics as they were directly taken from source. I have now reworded it. the previous citation covers this claim --jojo@nthony (talk) 11:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Back in India, he expanded the scope of his researches to cover wider aspects of reproductive biology for which he established a Primate Research Laboratory at IISc in 1965: this is cited to a webpage about the PRL, which doesn't support the information in the sentence. The next citations do cover it, so I think you could just cut that footnote. Citation moved to external links--jojo@nthony (talk) 12:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Why is "unfolding of LH binding to LH receptors in the target cell" in italics? Taken directly from source. Since these were purely scientific terms, did not want to change them --jojo@nthony (talk) 12:03, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• The style for article titles is to put them in quotes; you're using italics -- e.g. "Effect of ICSH on Early Pregnancy in Hypophysectomized Pregnant Rats". Italics is normally used only for book names. I have reformatted the article listing using Provelt --jojo@nthony (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Do we really need to list thirteen scientests who attended his International Symposium on gonadotropins? Removed the ones who did not have a Wiki article.--jojo@nthony (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:19, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think italics is necessary for quotes as you're using them, and if I were you I'd replace the IISc picture, but neither of those is a reason to delay GA. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

• • Hi friend, thanks for your efforts here. I have replaced the IISc image, too. Trust this helps. Thanks. --jojo@nthony (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)