Talk:Alexei Starobinsky

Alexei Starobinsky is currently a Physics and astronomy good article nominee. Nominated by Sgubaldo (talk) at 02:05, 13 January 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Russian theoretical physicist and cosmologist (1948–2023)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the science and academia work group. Astronomy Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article contains a translation of Alexei Alexandrowitsch Starobinski from de.wikipedia.

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Alexei Starobinsky/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Sgubaldo (talk · contribs) 02:05, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Ldm1954 (talk · contribs) 07:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It will take me a bit. An initial brief look indicates that it looks good, although there are a few uncited statements that may need cleaning. More to come. Ldm1954 (talk) 07:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking this up. Sgubaldo (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments:

• Please include the title of his PhD thesis. Ideal would be a link to a pdf as well, but this may not exist.
• If you mention Hawking radiation, you have to say something about whether it is real, as I believe this is still being debated. There is a lot more material on this, including on the page on it. You need to carefully say something.
• Overall it is well constructed and well sourced.

But, it is not obvious to me whether everything in

WP:Physics. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Important. please go to MediaWiki, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=cosmic+inflation&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image. There are images which would probably be useful to illustrate. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • PhD Thesis - I've included the title of his PhD thesis (Quantum effects and wave amplification in strong gravitational fields) in the infobox and education section. I tried to find a link to it online, but I can't find it anywhere, not even on lists of his publications.
  • Hawking Radiation – I've added a note specifically stating that this is theoretical and hasn't been observed.
  • Research Section – Sure, I'm not an expert in the area either, so I'm happy to wait for someone else from
    WP:Physics
    to take a look.
  • Image – I've included the classic timeline of the universe image, with a short caption on when the inflationary epoch took place.

  Sgubaldo (talk) 12:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b (

lists

):

2. It is factually accurate and
   source spot-check
   .

   a (

   reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism

   ):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Ldm1954 (talk) 12:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]