Talk:Wu Zhonghua/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Balon Greyjoy (talk · contribs) 02:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 02:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. 1. Is it well written?

   1.1. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Lead

   Consider adding more material to the lead section. The lead section has an introductory sentence, and then jumps immediately to Wu's time at NACA. I would recommend adding a sentence about his early career in China before moving to the US. — Expanded lead to summarize the article.

   Early life and education

   Be more clear about the ancestral home. What is the significance of it? Did one or both of his parents come from Suzhou, or was it several generations back? Did he have much of a connection with Suzhou? — In Chinese culture, ancestral home is far more important than birth place and is always mentioned in biographies. I've added a link to ancestral home (China).

   "However, when the Imperial Japanese Army..." Using "however" comes across as editorializing; I would recommend removing it. — Removed.

   "Wu resumed his studies and after graduating in 1940, stayed at Lianda as a faculty member."The verb tense is slightly confusing here. I would cut down on the sentence and keep it all in the past tense. My take is "Wu resumed his studies and graduated in 1940, and remained at Lianda as a faculty member." — Edited.

   "Tsinghua/Lianda alumna and faculty member." This is slightly confusing. I'm assuming she had a similar path as Wu (student at Tsinghua and then Lianda, and then a faculty member at Lianda). My take is "...a former classmate and fellow physicist at Lianda." — Edited.

   Career in the United States

   "In late 1943, Wu won Tsinghua University's Boxer Indemnity Scholarship and went to study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States, where he and his wife both became PhD students." This is a long sentence. I would say something to the effect of "...won Tsinghua University's Boxer Indemnity Scholarship and began his PhD at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology." Did both he and Li earn this scholarship? — Edited. Not sure if Li also earned the scholarship, sources only mention his scholarship.

   "Wu specialized in the internal combustion engine, and Li studied mechanical engineering." There's a disparity between the descriptions of the specializations, as Wu's is very specific and a subset of mechanical engineering, while Li's description of very broad. Additionally, I don't think that you need to include Li's studies, as she has her own page and is not the subject of the article. — Edited.

   "..., and the couple took turns looking after the children." Is this significant? In what way were they taking turns? If they were both taking separate breaks from their studies to be a stay at home parent for long stretches of time, I think it is relevant, but is not significant if they were just coordinating their day-to-day schedules for child care. — Sources emphasize the fact that he shared the child-raising responsibilities, likely because it was an unusual thing for men to do in the 1940s.

   "...Li hers a year later" Is this a necessary detail? Li has her own page, and is not the subject of the article. — Removed

   "National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA, the predecessor of NASA)" You use this phrase twice (once here, and once in the lead section), and it's not necessary to spell out the acronym twice, as well as mention it's status relative to NASA. — Fixed

   "...which was considered a major breakthrough in the development of turbomachinery." Who considers it this? In what ways was it a breakthrough? Clearly, the discovery was significant, as it was included in the designs of future engines, but this sentence comes across as vague and unsubstantiated. — Added more details on its significance

   "With the outbreak of the Korean War, relations between the US and the newly established People's Republic of China turned openly hostile, and Wu and his wife decided they could no longer work for the US military." This is a bit of a run-on sentence, look for ways to cut down its length. — Shortened

   "In 1954, they resolved to return to China." As the previous sentence used a pronoun to reference Wu, this could be slightly confusing switching to "they." In the context of this article, there are not many individuals mentioned, so it's clear who is being discussed. But I still think "Wu and his wife" or "Wu and Li" should be used over "they." — Edited

   "To avoid suspicion of the US government, the family flew to Britain in August ostensibly for vacation, and from there they travelled through Switzerland and Austria to Czechoslovakia, and finally arriving in Beijing at the end of the year via the Soviet Union." This is a long sentence, my take is to cut down on the wording for the different way points. Also, ensure the tense is consistent, and remove "finally," as that comes across as editorializing. My take is: "To avoid suspicion of the US government, the family flew to Britain in August for vacation, and travelled to China through Switzerland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, and the Soviet Union." — Edited

   Career in China

   "In 1958, Wu was persecuted for criticizing the Great Leap Forward, but was rehabilitated the next year." Can you go into more detail for this? Was he arrested, fired, harassed, etc. for persecution? What did the rehabilitation process involve? — Edited to make more specific and linked political rehabilitation

   "Many scientific research programs were cancelled during the Great Famine, and he was later sent to the countryside for three years to receive "Socialist Education"." It's implied but not stated that Wu's program was one of the cancelled ones. Explain more specifically of when his program was cancelled. Also, be more specific on where he went for his Socialist Education, as the "countryside" is vague. — Added location and other details

   "ground to a halt" This term is a euphemism; see if you can use a different way to describe his research stopped. — Edited

   "After the end of the Cultural Revolution in 1976, the CAS established the Institute of Engineering Thermophysics (IET) in 1980, which had originally been planned for 1963, and Wu became its founding director." This is a long sentence, and I don't think the history of the IET is necessary to include in a biographical article. My take is "In 1980, the CAS established the Institute of Engineering Thermophysics (IET), with Wu as its founding director." — Edited

   "After Sino-American relations were normalized in 1979, Wu led a group of Chinese scientists to visit the United States for the first time since he returned to China in 1954." I know its only a year, but this is out of place chronologically with the previous sentence. Also, do you have any more info on what the scientists were doing when they came to the US? Were they visiting a specific university/lab? Did they establish any long-term partnerships? — Edited for chronology. The source mentions a lot of places he visited, including universities, companies and research institutes, without going into too many specifics, but it would be too tedious to mention all of them. AFAICT, the visit was mainly significant in its symbolic value.

   "twice, in 1957 and 1982" Remove twice, as it is redundant to subsequently include two years that he won. — Removed

   Be consistent on how you reference years. My take for his time on committees it to add a phrase with the years, such as "...Standing Committee of the 6th from 1983 to 1988, and the 7th National People's Congress from 1988 to 1992." — Edited

   Is there any more information on awards that Wu received? I think this information belongs in an "Awards and honors" section, but at its current length of 3 sentences, it is more appropriate in the career section. — Added a couple more items

   Scientific contributions

   "He reduced three-dimensional flow problems to problems of iterating two solutions of two independent variables. The relaxation or direct matrix method was used for subsonic flows and the method of characteristics for supersonic flows." This is too technical of an explanation of Wu's research. No doubt that the calculations and methods of his discovery are very complicated, but the description of iterating multiple solutions and variables, as well as the description of the matrix method, do not describe his discovery to someone unfamiliar with it (myself included). I would instead describe the significance of the three-dimensional flow theory, as that will better communicate the importance of Wu's research to an uninformed reader. — Unfortunately, the source I could find (a NASA report) is geared toward scientists and does not explain the significance to the general public. I think his theory greatly reduces the complexity of the calculation of aerodynamic flows, but don't have a source to verify my understanding.

   "After returning to China, in the 1960s..." As he returned to China in 1954, I don't think it's necessary to add the return to China phrase when describing events in the 1960s, as there won't be confusion on if his research occured in China or the US. — Removed

   "...he developed a body-fitted, nonorthogonal curvilinear coordinate system to improve computational accuracy. At the Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, he and his colleagues developed shock-fitting and artificial compressibility methods for solutions in two- and three-dimensional transonic flows." Try linking to other Wikipedia pages, such as Curvilinear coordinates, to give the reader some context. Additionally, describe the significance of this discoveries. — Linked. Again, source does not explain the significance for the general public

   "many aircraft engines" Personal preference, but I avoid using "many" as it is hard to quantify. My take on this sentence would just be to state that it impacted the designs of aircraft engines, including... — Removed "many"

   Retirement and death

   "famous surgeon" I would remove this, as fame is not an objective assessment, and it is understood that a doctor who operates on him is a surgeon. Additionally, put "Dr." ahead of "Wu Mengchao." Also, since he did not relapse for 5 years, I would argue the operation was successful, not just initially successful. My take is "He was successfully treated by Dr. Wu Mengchao in Shanghai." — Edited

   "In 1990, Wu Zhonghua and his wife were invited to live and teach at Clemson University for four months, and he gave a series of lectures at the NASA Lewis Research Center." Why did you include his full name in this sentence, when he is referenced as "Wu" for the remainder of the article? Also, I would remove "live and," and just leave it as "invited to teach at Clemson..." — Edited

   1.2. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   See section 1.1 for comments on wording.

2. 2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   2.1. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   No concern.

   2.2. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   No concern. There isn't much contentious material (as far as I can tell) or a bias in the page, so I'm presuming that the Chinese websites used as sources are not overly biased as well.

   2.3. It contains no original research:

   This article heavily cites a Chinese source for the English material. As I cannot read the website, I am taking it on faith that it addresses the information to which it is attributed.

   2.4. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   No concern. The Earwig search reveals no similarities with sources.

   2.5. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   No concern.

   2.6. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   No concern.

3. 3. Is it neutral?

   3.1. It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   No concern.

4. 4. Is it stable?

   4.1. It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

   No concern. It looks like youa re the primary editor.

5. 5. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   5.1. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   No concern.

   5.2. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   Captions are good. Are there any available photos of the statue from a head-on perspective? — No other images are available on the Commons

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

@Zanhe: I have finished my review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Nice job on the article. My main critique would be to make the descriptions of his research more understandable for those without a technical background. Happy editing! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 04:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Balon Greyjoy: Thanks for your detailed review and apologies for the delay. I've edited the article to incorporate most of your suggestions. For the issues I've been unable to resolve and for answers to your questions, please see my replies directly following your comments above. -Zanhe (talk) 10:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@Zanhe: Excellent; I'll take a look at it this weekend! Balon Greyjoy (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Additional comments

@Zanhe: Great job with the article. I don't agree with your inclusion of mentioning that he and Li took turns taking classes, but that is a matter of opinion. I'm going to make 2 changes before I pass the article:

• "He was elected to the Standing Committee of the 6th and 7th National People's Congress, serving from 1983 until his death in 1992." will be changed to "He was elected to the Standing Committee of the 6th and 7th National People's Congress, and served from 1983 until his death in 1992." to keep the tense consistent.
• " In 1990, Wu and his wife were invited to teach at Clemson University for four months, and he gave a series of lectures at the NASA Lewis Research Center." will become " In 1990, Wu and Li were invited to teach at Clemson University for four months, and he gave a series of lectures at the NASA Lewis Research Center." Your article predominantly references Li by her name, and this will keep it consistent with the rest of this article.

Nice job overall; I look forward to reviewing your work in the future. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 11:32, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@Balon Greyjoy: Thanks again for taking the time to review the article and for your many helpful suggestions! -Zanhe (talk) 05:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)