Talk:Lovell Telescope

Nomination

This is an excellent article and I am nominating it for assessment as a "Good Article". Peter I. Vardy 15:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

I have reviewed this article in accordance with the Good Article (GA) criteria. There are seven main criteria that the article must comply with to pass:

1. Well-written: Pass
2. Factually accurate: Pass
3. Broad: Pass
4. Neutrally written: Pass
5. Stable: Pass
6. Well-referenced: Pass
7. Images: Pass

In my opinion for this GA Review, this article has passed all the necessary GA criteria categories. It has accurate information, is well-written, and has cited its sources and references. If no one has a problem with this, I will award it GA status in a few days. Please give me your feedback/comments/complaints (if any), so we can improve on this article if needed. INFORMATION CENTER (T • C) 03:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This article has passed and is now a GA. INFORMATION CENTER (T • C) 03:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Version 0.7

This article is of high quality, but the topic is just a little below the threshold for importance. We'll look at it again for the next release. Walkerma (talk) 04:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Lovell Telescope/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA Sweeps: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree that it's a good article. It might meet the letter of the GA requirements, but there is no detailed information regarding the telescope's performance/specs. The amount of paint needed to cover it is interesting, but what about how it actually works? What frequency bands are covered and what are the associated noise temperatures and G/T? What about a system block diagram? Is the front end cooled? How is band switching done? Can it operate on more than one band at a time? What technology (materials, semiconductors, etc.) are used at the various bands. How is the positioning managed and what are the tracking specs? What about noise reduction techniques, data processing, computer power, any AI? That's just a list of questions off the top of my head and, in my opinion, a good article would make an attempt to address at least some of them. 86.129.174.70 (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2019 (UTC) ==

Even if you go and visit Jodrell Bank you won't get any of that information because they focus on providing Instagrammable displays for school parties, not tech details about the telescope system. If the visitors' centre won't provide such technical information it's expecting a lot of Wikipedia to provide it. As for the GA award - like the JB visitor centre, style and presentation seem to be valued over hard technical content. 217.45.50.208 (talk) 18:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lovell Telescope. 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/20071005024236/http://www.gresham.ac.uk/event.asp?PageId=45&EventId=669 to http://www.gresham.ac.uk/event.asp?PageId=45&EventId=669

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) 21:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lovell Telescope. 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/20090421203309/http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects/astronomy/1961-159.aspx to http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects/astronomy/1961-159.aspx

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) 06:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)