Overall, this is a short, but nice article (the size is fine). I did find a few issues though:
"He is most known for bringing what is now the School of Polymer, Textile & Fiber Engineering to Georgia Tech, although new degrees introduced during Hall's administration included electrical engineering and civil engineering in December 1896, textile engineering in February 1899, and engineering chemistry in January 1901." This feels a bit like a run-on and could probably be split into two sentences.
It probably could be split into two sentences for clarity, but it isn't technically a run-on from a grammatical standpoint. It's just a "long sentence," which, depending on the desired style, can be considered correct or incorrect mechanically, but it is correct from a strict grammatical standpoint. A minor point and a pet peeve to be sure, but it's something that you might want to know for the future. :)
LaMenta3 (
talk)
20:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)reply
"He was appointed to the United States Military Academy in 1877, and graduated from West Point in 1881." This makes it sound like he got an academic position there, when really he got in as a student.
Because of the way that the application process for military academies works (potential cadets must be nominated by a senator, if I'm not mistaken), saying that he was "appointed" is proper language for this context.
LaMenta3 (
talk)
20:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)reply
"but the quote from geologist Sir Archibald Geikie's 1905 published work remains on the front of the building: "In the first place I would put accuracy."" Should be cited.
For the first source, I would prefer noting it as a general source and adding in page numbers for each part used. Since it's 500 pages it could be anywhere in that book.
Overall, this is a short, but nice article (the size is fine). I did find a few issues though:
"He is most known for bringing what is now the School of Polymer, Textile & Fiber Engineering to Georgia Tech, although new degrees introduced during Hall's administration included electrical engineering and civil engineering in December 1896, textile engineering in February 1899, and engineering chemistry in January 1901." This feels a bit like a run-on and could probably be split into two sentences.
It probably could be split into two sentences for clarity, but it isn't technically a run-on from a grammatical standpoint. It's just a "long sentence," which, depending on the desired style, can be considered correct or incorrect mechanically, but it is correct from a strict grammatical standpoint. A minor point and a pet peeve to be sure, but it's something that you might want to know for the future. :)
LaMenta3 (
talk)
20:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)reply
"He was appointed to the United States Military Academy in 1877, and graduated from West Point in 1881." This makes it sound like he got an academic position there, when really he got in as a student.
Because of the way that the application process for military academies works (potential cadets must be nominated by a senator, if I'm not mistaken), saying that he was "appointed" is proper language for this context.
LaMenta3 (
talk)
20:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)reply
"but the quote from geologist Sir Archibald Geikie's 1905 published work remains on the front of the building: "In the first place I would put accuracy."" Should be cited.
For the first source, I would prefer noting it as a general source and adding in page numbers for each part used. Since it's 500 pages it could be anywhere in that book.