Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the Manhattan Project/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 3 June 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Timeline of the Manhattan Project edit

Featured list candidates/Timeline of the Manhattan Project/archive1

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A timeline is a peculiar type of list article. This one is on the Manhattan Project. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Impeccably referenced, highly educational, quite encyclopedic and a valuable resource for this site. — Cirt (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I didn't read all the way through, but I already noticed some typos. I fixed them. Please proofread to make sure it is typo-free. Other than that the list looks good.—Chris!_c/t 00:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SUPPORT As a fan of the Manhattan Project, I was happy to see how much work went into this. I don't think a few typos should hold it back, and I'll gladly see if I can fix a few of them. Excellent work.--ColonelHenry (talk) 22:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments really nice piece of work, and incredibly interesting.

"2013[1] dollars)" would prefer to see that citation the other side of the closing parenthesis.
- Me too, but it is generated by the inflation-fn template
You could link uranium.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"so a more complex Implosion-type nuclear weapon " no need for "Implosion" to be capitalised.
- Decapped. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Britain and France" shouldn't that really be "Great Britain"?
- No idea. Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No need to over link "Einstein-Szilárd letter" and it should have an en-dash (like the first instance).
- That n-dash subverted the duplicate link checker. Unlinked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you link "nuclear fission", perhaps you could link "neutron"?
- Done. James Chadwick would want it that way. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" that Uranium 235 is " for consistency, that should be "that uranium-235 is"... please check for others.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could link "slow neutron".
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Rudolph Peierls" Rudolf according to our article.
- Whoops. Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Frisch-Peierls memorandum" needs an en-dash.
- Ecch. Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"This is given to..." the memo or the pound of enriched uranium?!
- The memorandum. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Again, avoid overlinking (e.g. Tizard).
- Unlinked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't bother linking "research project".
- Unlinked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Video of the Trinity nuclear test." no full stop required.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" Roosevelt formally authorizes the project." consider reiterating that this is the Manhattan Project he's authorising.
- Can't say that, because it is not yet the Manhattan Project. Changed to "atomic bomb project". Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Our article on "Stone and Webster" has "Stone & Webster"
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"July 30, " for consistency, that comma should be a colon.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Aerial view of the Operation Crossroads..." caption doesn't need a full stop.
- Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are sometimes more specific articles for military ranks, e.g. Field marshal (United Kingdom) which would be more useful.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" exploding bridgewire detonators" hyphen needed.
- Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"at Alamogordo, New Mexico.[65]." remove spare full stop.
- Removed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could link "Potsdam Ultimatum" to the relevant section of the bombings article?
- No. Linked to its own article. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Page ranges in the refs need to use en-dash per WP:DASH.
- Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need "Science timelines" as a cat since you've got the more refined "Physics timelines".

Otherwise a great (and tragic) read. Thank you for your work and the nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:49, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Godot13 (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - A very well written, well referenced, and education timeline. Just a few comments/points for consistency: Noting that you tend to only link on the first use of a term or reference…

1941-July 2: James Chadwick is not linked.
- Gasp! Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
1942-September 23: William R. Purnell is linked to a page that doesn’t exist (perhaps this is okay).
- Yes, it is okay. WP:REDLINK: Good red links help Wikipedia—they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Wikipedia is far from finished.
1943-August 19: Churchill is already linked in 1942.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
1943-September 8: Combined Policy Committee is linked to a page that does not exist.
- This is okay. I will eventually create the article. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
1943-Hanford Site is linked twice.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
brigadier general is never linked (first use in 1942-September 23), should also be capitalized for consistency
- WP:MILTERMS: Military ranks follow the same capitalization guidelines as given under Titles of people above. For example, Brigadier General John Smith, but John Smith was a brigadier general.
First use of Colonel is 1942-September 17 (not linked).
- Linked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Major General linked in intro, also 1942-August 13.
- The lead doesn't count. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First use of General (full) 1945-July 25 not linked.
- Linked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
1944-September 2: “Chemists” for “chemists”.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:53, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again, well done. -- Godot13 (talk) 04:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review! Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:55, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Well written, educational, very nice work.--Godot13 (talk) 15:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

September 23, 1942: Something looks like it's missing before ref 36. It's not just a period, but judging by the sentence as a whole some key words are not there.
- Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
May 21, 1946: "Slotin lifted the upper hemisphere with his left hand and dropped it onto the floor, so preventing a more serious accident." This feels like it would read better without the "so", but that may just be me.
- It seemed too long for a timeline to me, so I cut it back. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Giants2008 (Talk) 20:49, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suport great article, although it would be nice to have a few more costs/payments inserted. Nergaal (talk) 01:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.