Talk:Willard Libby

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

Place of Death[edit]

All other encyclopaedias seem to point to Loas Angeles as the place where he died. Can someone check this? I don't not want to alter Cambridge without a written (printed) high class source. --DrJunge (talk) 06:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Spontaneous fission[edit]

According to [1], Libby tried to find spontaneous fission in 1939 and found the upper limit of its partial desintegration constant to be 10-22 s-1. --217.21.43.22 (talk) 17:23, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 17:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


  • I propose to undertake this review and will read through the article in detail shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

First reading[edit]

The first half of the article has a number of careless errors while the second half is much better:

  • "He sided with Edward Teller on pursuing a crash program to develop the hydrogen bomb, help the Atoms for Peace program, and defended the administration's atmospheric nuclear testing." - the tenses in this sentence are a bit muddled.
    YesY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "When he was five, Libby's parents moved to the Santa Rosa, California" - "the" not needed.
    YesY Deleted word. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "When he was five, Libby's parents moved to the Santa Rosa, California. Libby began his education in a two-room Colorado schoolhouse." - These two sentences need to be reversed to make them chronological.
    YesY Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "... independently of the work of George de Hevesy and Max Pahl" - I suggest you put this phrase at the beginning of the sentence.
    YesY Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "He became and assistant professor of Chemistry there in 1938" - typo.
    YesY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "and the fissile uranium-235 made up only one-hundred and fortieth of natural uranium." - Couldn't you express this as a percentage, or say "less than one percent"?
    YesY Done. I thought one part in 140 was easier for people to grasp than 0.7% Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • " a heavier one. In fact," - sentence structure.
    YesY Joined sentences together. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "In addition to the developing a suitable barrier," - typo.
    YesY Deleted word. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "had to assist in design an industrial gaseous" - a couple of words missing here.
    YesY Added words. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "Only a few tests by Libby indicated that the Norris-Adler they were working indicated that it would." - This sentence is a bit garbled.
    YesY Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Wikilink or explain "Norris-Adler"
    YesY That's an idea. Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "He remained confident that with an all-effort," - "all-out-effort"?
    YesY Added words. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • He was working on using gaseous diffusion and finding problems. It is not clear to me whether he was successful in the end, or whether the isotopes were eventually separated by a quite different method, in a new process developed by Kellex.
    YesY He was successful in the end, but the the isotopes were eventually separated by a quite different method, in a new process developed by Kellex Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
  • "a professorship in Chemistry Department at the " - typo.
    YesY Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
That's all for now. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article! Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

GA criteria[edit]

  • The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout.
  • The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
  • The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
  • The article is neutral.
  • The article is stable.
  • The single images is relevant and has a fair use rationale.
  • Final assessment - I am satisfied with the alterations made and believe this article meets the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)