Talk:Entropy/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 08:27, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

I don't think this is ready for GA nomination. Much of the lead is not a summary of later material (WP:GACR 1). This material is not sourced, almost all of the history section is unsourced, the starting subsection of the definitions section is unsourced, most of the Carnot cycle subsection is unsourced, much of the classical thermodynamics subsection is unsourced, several whole paragraphs of the statistical mechanics subsection are unsourced, and several paragraphs of the entropy of a system subsection are unsourced. The first two paragraphs of the second law of thermodynamics section are unsourced, etc. etc (GACR 2). The article is long, and although it does use summary style it may possibly be overdetailed in parts; the section on hermeneutics seems completely off-topic (GACR 3). Given all this, I think this is sufficiently far from meeting the good article criteria to be a quick fail (WP:GAFAIL #2). Additionally I don't think the Shannon-von Neumann quote meets the standards of clearly stating the attribution of the quote (was it Shannon or von Neumann) or for formatting quotes, and the equation formatting in the "Interdisciplinary applications of entropy" section is just gross. No prejudice against re-nomination but only after a serious effort to make sure that everything is at an appropriate level of detail and everything is sourced. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:27, 29 November 2019 (UTC)