Alexander Langmuir is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by BluePenguin18 🐧 ( 💬 ) at 03:40, 16 April 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: American epidemiologist

This article is rated B-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 (assessed as Mid-importance). Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alexander Langmuir/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: BluePenguin18 (talk · contribs) 03:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 03:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'll review this article. Should have comments here in a day or few. Esculenta (talk) 03:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• the lead is far too short to adequately summarize the article contents. Please follow the guidelines as outlined in wp:Lead

Early life & ed

• could include that he was the third of five children like he says in his video interview
• what year did Langmuir enter Harvard?
• is it intentional to give the 1932 event sandwiched between two 1931 events?
• I suppose by reading between the lines one might infer he entered Medical School in late 1931 (assuming a four-year program) but maybe this should be said explicitly
• perhaps link biomedical statistics, residency, public health
• abbreviation CDC needs to be introduced somewhere

Career

• suggested links: Health Officer, surface chemistry, vector-borne disease, polio eradication, technical advisory group, autoimmune, progesterone, breast cancer, Spartans
• "Langmuir received an Honorary Doctor of Science degree from Emory University in 1970 and an honorary Doctor of Law degree from Johns Hopkins University in 1978." inconsistent capitalization of honorary
• current text: "In January 1976, soldiers at Fort Dix in New Jersey contracted swine influenza A/H1N1, prompting comparisons to the 1918–1920 flu pandemic that spread from Camp Funston in Kansas." suggest: "In January 1976, soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, contracted swine influenza A/H1N1, prompting comparisons to the 1918–1920 flu pandemic that originated at Camp Funston, Kansas." commas to set off the appositives, and more precise language about pandemic beginning
• "outsiders like Langmuir, who was currently stationed at Fort Liberty in North Carolina." -> is "then-stationed" more appropriate?
• "European pregnant women" -> "pregnant European women"
• should parenthetically use IUD acronym right after first full-length use
• article doesn't say what year he retired

Personal

• use endashes, not hyphens, for number ranges
• any information on what he might have been interested in outside of work? Did any colleagues talk about his personality in tributes/obituaries?
• Volume 144, Issue 8 doesn't needs capitalisation
• the CDC page includes mention of him being a strong proponent of "shoe leather" epidemiology and then mentions the "disease detectives" … seems like interesting tidbits that could possibly enhance the article

Sources & spotchecks

• all sources appear to be reliable and used appropriately (mix of scholarly research articles, government/medical/health organisation webpages, and newspaper articles)
• I watched the video of source #2 for long enough to verify several of the citations it was used for, but I didn't hear where he mentions the names of all of his siblings, as is implied by the citation
• also verified all citations from sources 5, 26, 36, 37; no problems noted

Images

• all images have suitable licenses, and are appropriately captioned
• the "image File:Alexander Langmuir with William C Watson Jr and Leona Baumgartner.jpg" indicates that the photo was taken 15 October 1996, but that doesn't work with Langmuir's death date, nor with Baumgartner's death year in 1991. I guess that doesn't really affect the article, since the caption doesn't mention the year, but I though I'd point it out.
• the category:American atheists seems unusual to me, do you know why it's there (doesn't seem to be any justification in the article)

Overall impressions

The article has great depth and detail about Langmuir’s career, including his early education, influences, and key contributions to the field of epidemiology. It is well referenced, and provides a comprehensive coverage of his career. If I had any criticism of this article, it's that perhaps it's a little dry (perhaps unavoidable given the nature of the material). Any engaging narratives or vignettes to add? Maybe the section on Langmuir’s personal life could be expanded to provide a more rounded picture of him as an individual beyond his professional identity? This could include more about his influences, motivations, and any personal challenges he faced. Also, imo, the article it doesn't quite clearly enough state the impact of his lifetime work. Even William Foege (who helped devise strategy to eradicate smallpox and so is obviously a qualified opinion) outright says "he revolutionized the way epidemiology was used in public health practice, first in the United States and then throughout the world" and elaborates more on his great impacts (in 1996 source) … so I think it's okay to use Wikipedia voice to make his influence maybe more clear? Is there any lasting impact of his work on modern public health practices, and are his methodologies still applied today in epidemiology and public health service? Esculenta (talk) 04:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]