Talk:Samuel King Allison

WikiProject class rating

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)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 07:56, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Lead his award of the Medal of Merit warrants a mention in the lead, it is highly notable a brief sentence explaining the "scientists' movement" would be of benefit Early lifeY X-rays needs a space after widely used. Manhattan Project suggest In September 1941, Allison joined the S-1 Uranium Committee, which coordinated the early investigations into the feasibility of an atomic bomb. argued that larger steps Later life suggest it could accelerate particles to stellar nucleosynthesis drop initial caps
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	atomic bomb is overlinked in the body
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Placing on hold for seven days for comments to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Passing, well done. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 11:38, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

• Changes made as suggested. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

no discussion of his work impacting his health?Juror1 (talk) 19:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Samuel King Allison. 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/20141017070854/http://www.gf.org/fellows/230-samuel-k-allison to http://www.gf.org/fellows/230-samuel-k-allison

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)