Nikola Tesla

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's a top importance article, and I would like to list it here first before putting listing it as a good article nominee.

Thanks, Albacore (talk) 19:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since your goal at this point is GA, I reviewed the article primarily with the GA criteria in mind. The article is generally well-written and quite a few editors have contributed to it. But there are a number of issues and there is some more work required before it is up to the GA standard. Here are some comments I hope will be helpful:

 Done, dead links removed.

 Done Removed image from Further reading section, re-arranged some images to different sections.

 Done, changed to PD-US-patent only.

 Done changed to Non-free 3D image with a fair use rationale.

 Done, tagged both for deletion.

 Done, delinked some common terms

 Done, linked

 Done, now links to PDF.

 Done, now contains the information cited.

 Done, unreliable references removed.

I hope these comments are helpful and appreciate all the work that has gone into the article thus far. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say I'm an expert in the field, but I feel I have a reasonable enough armchair understanding of the topic. This sentence in the lead seems highly suspect and I can't see any support for these claims in the body:

"In addition to his work on electromagnetism and electromechanical engineering, Tesla contributed in varying degrees to the establishment of robotics, remote control, radar, and computer science, and to the expansion of ballistics, nuclear physics, and theoretical physics."

Tesla was a gifted inventor and extremely hard worker, but I have to question his ability to contribute to nuclear physics for one. The body of the article doesn't go into this at all, nor does it mention ballistics, computer science, robotics (mentioned, but apparently incorrectly) or theoretical physics. Several of these claims seem to be found on this website, although that might just be copying something else (even this article). And having written the majority of the History of radar article, the claim to priority here is essentially groundless and only leave it in to avoid edit wars. Without real support, these claims need to be removed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:38, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I take it back, the radar article has been so expanded my contribution is now a tiny minority of the body. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]