Talk:Joseph Rotblat

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please source these claims.[edit]

He was barred from the United States and on departure from New York, his research notes and correspondence mysteriously disappeared. He later discoved in his dossier in the United States a statement that he wanted to join the Royal Air Force so that he could fly to Poland and defect to the Soviet Union.

I'm not saying that these things are untrue, only that they need to be sourced.Grace Note 03:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Its in a statement of a student of his, Dr Alan Salmon, contained within a tribute in Insight, published by the University of Liverpool this year. I've put the statement back with a rider. MAG1 13:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Produce the details of the source here, so that it can be verified. And add a footnote. Until you do, it's out. Please don't reinsert disputed edits without providing source details. Grace Note 00:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Well I don't know what you thought the above message was about. All done, please leave it alone now. It would have been polite to have responded to the last message a bit more temperately. MAG1 20:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


British?[edit]

Could editors wishing to add Rotblat to British foo categories and state that he was British please provide a source stating that he was? Grace Note 00:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Complete red herring this- Rotblat's handle is a bit of a giveaway. He naturalised as a British subject in 1946. Source added (Nobel prize CV). MAG1 20:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

he had polish citizenship too! kowalmistrz

This site isn't correct. Józef Rotblat his whole live protested to be called a british man. He always said that he is a Polish with british passport and protested to be called "Joseph", but Józef

The cited site is opinion, not fact. Rotblat would never have "protested" at being called any particular name. He was "Joseph" to most, "Józef" to contemporary family, "Josh" to younger family and just "Prof" to colleagues. Mesdale (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC).

I am afraid that it is right. I am sure that it might be true that he said he was Polish with a British passport, but he was a permanent immigrant to the UK. He did not use the Polish form of his name (and he could have) after settling in the UK: as far as I have seen for his publications and his work with Pugwash, he used the anglicised version of the name, and this was the name used when he received his Nobel prize. I am pretty certain that Roblat was happy with who he was, but not at all any sort of nationalist, and lived pragmatically. MAG1 22:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Although he was an Ashkenazi Jew and not Polish, there is unfortunately no exact evidence of his ethnic affiliation. --L. Woititz (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Rotblat had to become a British subject in order to join the British Mission to the Manhattan Project. The US made it a condition that only British subjects were allowed to enter the US and join the project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.115.127 (talk) 19:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
They did, but Rotblat refused to do so. He was allowed to participate, but it was a factor in why he left. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Lodz or Warsaw?[edit]

Every source I see (including bios at the Nobel Prize and Pugwash site) mention Warsaw at his birthplace. IF no other source appears, I'll change it. User:Ejrrjs says What? 18:09, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I think this is bomb-proof, so have made the change. MAG1 22:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
He was born in Warsaw (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1995/rotblat-cv.html)- could someone please change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.243.253.114 (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Free University of Poland,[edit]

Polish Wikipedia says University of Warsaw.Xx236 15:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobel Prize[edit]

Why doesn't he have a little gold medallion by his name... he's certainly earned it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.39.212.101 (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

While I think that's a lovely idea, I don't see any precedence for it. Mesdale (talk) 10:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism[edit]

I can't see an edit button on the page and I can't be arsed to create an account, so can someone else remove the "strictly lesbian" vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.125.96.28 (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Photo[edit]

This article once had a better-defined lead photo of Rotblat from a later stage of his life.

It was apparently removed, and his present, poor-quality Los Alamos badge photo reinserted, due to questions of copyright about the later, better-quality photo.

Could someone please locate a better-quality public-domain photo of Rotblat to replace the present poor-quality lead Los Alamos photo?

Nihil novi (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 05:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)


Comments[edit]

This is an interesting article, on a fascinating figure. I have the following comments:

  • Do we know how Rotblat came to the attention of, and impressed, Ludwik Wertenstein?
    Yes, we do. I have re-written that part. The author of my source thought that the 1773 Commission of National Education was so obscure that no one would know anything about it, but he reckoned without the Wikipedia. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
  • "Most of his family had miraculously survived the war" - given that the article says that he was greatly affected by the murder of his wife in the Holocaust, "miraculously" seems a bit out of place and could be omitted
    Fair enough. It took a while for all the family to reappear. His brother Benjamin turned up alive in 1956. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
  • "campaigned for a three-year moratorium on all atomic research" - do we know how he undertook this campaign? (eg, through scientific or government contracts, through raising public awareness, etc?)
    A series of public lectures. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
  • "Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs. With Bertrand Russell and others, Rotblat organised the first of these in 1957 and continued to work within their framework until his death. " - I'd suggest noting what the Pugwash Conferences aim to achieve.
    Added text from the Pugwash article to that effect. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Nick-D (talk) 05:46, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

  • That all looks good - I'm pleased to pass this review Nick-D (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Assessment[edit]

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:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. 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:
    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—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. 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:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Nick-D (talk) 05:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)