Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Manhattan Project feed materials program

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history | Assessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

« Return to A-Class review list

Manhattan Project feed materials program

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

Manhattan Project feed materials program (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is an article I had been thinking about since I began working on improving the Manhattan Project articles a decade ago. It fills a gap in detailing an important but often neglected aspect of the project, namely how it acquired the vital minerals, particularly uranium, to enable the creation of nuclear weapons. That story is not without drama in its own right, as it moves from Canada's Arctic region to the Congo in Africa. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Nick-D

This is a really interesting topic. I'd like to offer the following comments:

  • I suspect that the para starting with "Ores from the Belgian Congo contained the most uranium" could be omitted from the lead, as it's too detailed and the lead is already quite long
    check Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:37, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we know how many Americans went to Shinkolobwe to get the mine going again? (e.g. was this a small number of advisors/project managers or a large labour force?)
    Did I say that any went? I cannot find that. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:37, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Post-war section is a bit confusing given it says Groves wanted to re-open Shinkolobwe when the previous section states that this had been done during the war. Had the mine subsequently re-closed?
    check It was in 1943. Clarified. Moved the section header. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:37, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Howe announced in the House of Commons of Canada that Eldorado had become a crown corporation" - did he give a cover reason for this?
    The source says: "'In the interests of military secrecy,' Howe added, he hoped that there would be no embarrassing questions, and there were none."
    So I looked it up in Canada's version of Hansard:

Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):

I wish to table order in council P.C. 535 of January 27, 1944, and before doing so I will make the following statement.

As a necessary means for the more effective prosecution of the war, the government of Canada has acquired all properties and assets of Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited, by expropriating all the capital shares of the company. Expropriation of the shares became effective as of three o'clock this afternoon.

Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited will in future be operated as a crown company, and will continue to carry on its present operations. The president, the directors and officers of Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited have been invited to continue to act in their present capacities, and have agreed to do so. There will be no change in existing arrangements affecting the employees of the company.

The directors of the company have agreed with the government that a fair value for the properties and assets of the company is represented by a price of $1.35 per share, and the directors and a number of other large shareholders have delivered their shares to the government at that price. The same share value is being offered to all shareholders of the company, and will be paid on delivery of the shares, properly endorsed, to the registrar and transfer agent, the Trusts and Guarantee Company Limited, Toronto,

I regret that for reasons of secrecy I am unable to give the house any further information on this subject. In the interests of military secrecy I hope that no questions about this matter will be asked until the necessity for withholding information no longer applies. I now table order in council P.C. 535 which effects the expropriation of all the capital shares of the company.

Really interesting. If either of the Axis powers had a competent intelligence service, this disclosure would have been a significant hint that the Allies had a nuclear program. Nick-D (talk) 06:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those changes look good, and I'm very pleased to support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 06:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Dumelow

Interesting article, I've started to look at the prose, will complete more when I can - Dumelow (talk) 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Background
Uranium series decay chain
  • "Only the richest uranium-bearing ore was exported to Olen, Belgium for the production of radium metal by Biraco, a subsidiary company of Union Minière du Haut Katanga"
    I was a little confused by this sentence that talks about uranium-rich ores being used to produce radium, a different element. Presumably the ores also contained significant quantities of radium?
    check For some value of "significant quantities". Added that radium-226 is a natural decay product of uranium-238, with a link to the Wikipedia article. (See chart on the right.) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The high grade of the ore from the mine—65% or more triuranium octoxide) (U3O8), known as black oxide, when most sites considered 0.03% to be good—enabled the company to dominate the market."
    Something's gone wrong with the brackets here
    check Removed stray parenthesis. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in 1941 sold for USD$4.52 per kilogram ($2.05/lb) (equivalent to $96/kg in 2024)."
    I know it's a function of the convert template interacting with the inflation one but I don't like the double sets of brackets here and in the following sentence, is there anything that can be done?
    I could use a comma ie:
    sold for USD$4.5/kg ($2.05/lb, equivalent to $99/kg in 2025) Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks better to me but I don't know if there's any MOS guidance in this area. It'll not stop me supporting so whatever you prefer. There are quite a few elsewhere in the article too - Dumelow (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Organisation
  • "Captain John R. Ruhoff, a chemical engineer who, as St Louis Area engineer, had worked on uranium metal production.[17][18] When Ruhoff, a chemical engineer who worked for Mallinckrodt, was inducted into the Army, Nichols had him assigned to the Manhattan District."
    Do we need to mention that he is a chemical engineer twice in successive sentences? "St Louis Area" is capitalised, this seems to be an army term for a sub-division of an engineer district but I was confused by this until I read the next paragraphs (I didn't know if the St Louis Area was part of Manhattan District or something separate or even if it was an army thing at all). Is there any assistance we can provide the reader here, or does it even need to be mentioned?
    check Re-worded to: "Ruhoff was a chemical engineer who worked for Mallinckrodt. When he was inducted into the Army, Nichols had him assigned to the Manhattan District. As the district's St Louis Area engineer, he had worked on uranium metal production." The district was divided into areas.
Uranium procurement (checked down to "Canada")
  • We say that there was 180 tonnes of uranium ore in Belgium in 1939 but that 3,200 tonnes of uranium-containing compounds were lost when the Germans invaded the next year. Are these referring to different materials, or was it that the British were only interested in 180 tonnes out of the whole stockpile?
    check Clarified that this was refined uranium oxide as opposed to uranium ore. The ore was waiting to be refined. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the first, of 470 tonnes (460 long tons) departed Lobito in September and arrived in New York in November; the second, of 669 tonnes (658 long tons)"
    Presumably a minor rounding error in the source, but this is one tonne less than the 1,140 stated in the preceding sentence
    check. I believe the first figure has been rounded. Changed to 1,139 tonnes. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The ore was stored in 2,006 steel drums 860 millimeters (34 in) high and 610 millimeters (24 in) in diameter,[30] labelled "uranium ore" and "product of Belgian Congo", in a warehouse at 2351 Richmond Terrace, Port Richmond, Staten Island, belonging to the Archer-Daniels-Midland Company.[29][31]"
    Feels like a bit of a long sentence, but appreciate that opinions on this vary
  • "The army also secured the remaining ore in Shinkolobwe, which was shipped to the United States: 950 tons of approximately 70% ore and 160 tons of 20% ore"
    Again, we have previously said there were 3,000 tons in the Congo. Was it that 2,000 tons was held somewhere away from Shinkolobwe?
    check Deleted "950 tons of approximately 70% ore and 160 tons of 20% ore" . Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In November 1943, the Middlesex Sampling Plant, a in Middlesex, New Jersey, was leased for storage, sampling and assaying. The ore was received in bags and sent for refining as required"
    Extraneous "a" before "in Middlesex"
    check Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Groves was appointed its chairman, with Sir Charles Hambro, the head of the British Raw Materials Mission in Washington, Frank Lee from the Treasury delegation as the British trustees, and George Bateman, a deputy minister and a member of the Combined Production and Resources Board, representing Canada"
    I think needs an "and" before "Frank Lee"
    check Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the contract was signed until 25 September 1944.[54] The agreement between the United States, the United Kingdom, and Belgium lasted ten years and financed the development of nuclear energy in Belgium."
    "was signed until" or "was signed on" and then lasted for 10 years?
    check Correct to "on". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "approximately 3,501 tonnes (3,859 short tons), of black oxide had been extracted from about 26,974 tonnes (29,734 short tons) of African ore, for which the government paid $9,113,800 (equivalent to $128,340,233 in 2024). Another 2,852 tonnes (3,144 short tons) had been purchased for $9,113,800 (equivalent to $128,340,233 in 2024)"
    Just checking that the two dollar identical amounts are correct here?
    check Ooops. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "not far south of the Arctic Circle"
    You've said previously "mined and shipped from the Arctic", but might be just outside of it?
  • "They were alleged to have misappropriated and significant funds from Eldorado through a network of secretly controlled companies"
    Doesn't read right, is it just the extra "and" between "misappropriated" and "significant"?
    check Deleted "and". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This decision was reportedly driven by the Canadian government's desire to avoid public disclosure of potentially sensitive wartime transactions. Terms of any settlement reached with Eldorado remained confidential"
    Missing "The" before "Terms"?
    check Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • " In order to thaw out the rock, electric heaters were brought in and ventilation was reduced, but this exposed the miner workers to a build up of radon gas."
    "mine workers" instead of "miner workers", might be worth using "radioactive radon gas" to express why this was a problem.
    check Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "LaBine asked the Americans to expedite the delivery of two new Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar aircraft to Canadian Pacific.[81] United States and Canadian military aircraft were used to move ore from Port Radium to Waterways. In 1943, 270 tonnes (300 short tons) of ore was moved by air.[41] He was also able to get some personnel released from the Canadian armed forces."
    The last "he" here is presumably LaBine again? Might be worth naming him as I had to check back to work it out.
    check Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the United States, carnotite ores were mined on the Colorado plateau for their vanadium content. The ores contained roughly 1.75% vanadium pentoxide (V2O5) and 0.25% uranium dioxide (UO2). Vanadium was important to the war effort as a hardening agent in steel alloys, and the Metals Reserve Company offered loans and subsidies to increase production. The carnotite sands tailings from this mining activity over the years contained low concentrations that were economically recoverable but uneconomical to ship"
    The "low concentrations" in the last sentence is presumably of uranium? The last metal mentioned was vanadium so it wasn't clear.
    check Clarified. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The remaining 44 tonnes (49 short tons) were never found."
    Again, doesn't tally with the 73 tonnes stated as missing and the 28 tonnes recovered, but might be a rounding error in the source.
    check Rounding. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uranium refining and processing
  • DuPont is listed as a black oxide producer in the table but not mentioned as such in the text
    check The scrap recovery plant? Added a paragraph about it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The production process involved adding black oxide to 3,800-litre (1,000 US gal) stainless steel tanks of hot concentrated nitric acid to produce a solution of uranyl nitrate. This was filtered through a stainless steel filter press and then concentrated in 1,100-litre (300 US gal) pots heated by steam coils to 120 °C (248 °F), the boiling point of uranyl nitrate. The molten uranyl nitrate was cooled to 80 °C (176 °F) and then pumped into ether that had been chilled to 0 °C (32 °F) in an ice water heat exchanger."
    If the uranyl nitrate was heated to boiling point wouldn't it be a vapour rather than "molten"? Maybe it was just below boiling point, or perhaps under pressure or was there a condensation step?
    The source says:

    The crude black oxide was added to hot concentrated nitric acid in large stainless-steel tanks to produce a crude uranyl nitrate solution, The uranyl nitrate solution was then filtered through a stainless steel filter press and subsequently concentrated in tanks heated by steam coils to the boiling point (248°F) of pure uranyl nitrate hexahydrate. After the molten crude uranyl nitrate was cooled to 176°F, it was pumped directly into cold ethero The water layer and ether layer separated, and the ether layer was washed with small amounts of distilled water, Then the purified material was re-extracted from the ether with relatively large quantities of distilled water. The solution of pure uranyl nitrate, which contained some ether, was heated to the boiling point to drive off the ether.

    Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. It's been a long time since I studied any chemistry so it's a bit beyond me but looks to be supported by the source - Dumelow (talk) 05:00, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In May 1945, Mallinckrodt decided to build a new brown oxide plant."
  • "Mallinckrodt was already producing 100 tonnes (110 short tons) of brown oxide per month or the Manhattan Project's requirement for 150 tonnes (160 short tons) and Union Carbide wanted to use the facilities for nickel compounds production for the K-25 project"
    "or" is wrong here. The K-25 project hasn't been mentioned previously, what was it?
    Corrected "or" to "for". Added explanation and a link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "OSRD had made arrangements with DuPont and Harshaw for the development of new processes to produce green salt and for the production of small quantities."
    Harshaw is mentioned for the first time here, I felt I could do with a little introduction of who they were, or a link to a relevant article
    It doesn't have an article. The Harshaw Chemical Company was founded by William Harshaw in 1892. It was acquired by Engelhard in 1988, which, in turn, was taken over by BASF in 2006. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Here, the process used graphite boxes within steel retorts."
    We've previously said the DuPont/Harshaw "process was adopted by all plants, the only difference being the shelves used to hold the brown oxide", is this a different process or were the boxes/retorts the "shelves"?
    check Same process. Elaborated on this. " the only difference being that Mallinckrodt used graphite boxes and shelves to hold the brown oxide while it was fluoridated in steel retorts at high temperatures, while Harshaw used magnesium and later nickel trays inside steel tubes lined with magnesium." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Linde built and operated a green salt plant under a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. Production began in October 1943 and continued until 1 July 1946, by which time 2,926 short tons (2,654 t) had been produced"
    This is the same quantity as you say was produced by Mallinckrodt so might be a copy/paste error? Your table says Linde produced 2,060 tons of UF4.
    check 2,060 tons. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • For Harshaw: "By 1 January 1947, it had produced 2,926 short tons (2,654 t) of green salt."
    Again I suspect a copy/paste error in the value here, your table says Harshaw produced 1,640 tons
    check 469 + 1,171 = 1,640. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The cost of production was $2.98 per kilogram ($1.35/lb) from brown salt and $2.09 per kilogram ($0.95/lb) from green salt."
    You've previously only said that "Hexafluoride was produced though the reaction of green salt with fluorine", was some also produced from brown salt?
    check The process was rejected as being more expensive. Deleted this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "While most of the neighboring elements on the periodic table can be reduced to form pure metal and slag, uranium did not behave this way.[167] (At the time it was mistakenly believed that uranium belonged under chromium, molybdenum and tungsten in the periodic table.[168]) "
    Second sentence is unusual in that it consists solely of information in brackets
    check Moved up and removed parentheses. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The pilot plant at Ames produced 1,395 metric tons (1,538 short tons) of metal "
    Your table list Iowa State as having produced 972 tons and Electo-Metallurgical as being the producer of 1,538 tons
    check Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A "bomb" (pressure vessel) containing uranium halide and sacrificial metal, probably magnesium, being lowered into a furnace"
    In a caption, probably requires a citation to support the "probably magnesium" part at least
    check Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Other minerals
  • "Once the research into isotope separation had progressed sufficiently, the contract for the isotope separation was awarded to the Standard Oil Company of Indiana, since fractionation was a common practice in the oil industry."
    Is it possible to avoid repetition of "isotope separation" here?
    check Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Boron section left me confused as to who was doing what. You mention there were two projects, one of reducing boron and one of fractionation. Harshaw are mentioned as producing a significant quantity but it is not said by what method. Standard Oil are mentioned as carrying out the fractionation, which I assumed was separating the boron trifluoride and dimethyl ether but then American Cyanamid are said to be processing the mixture.
  • "Polonium occurs naturally in various ores, and the lead dioxide residues from the refinery in Port Hope, left over after the removal of uranium and radium, were estimated to contain 0.2 to 0.3 milligrams (0.0031 to 0.0046 gr) of polonium per metric ton.[196][197] (A curie of polonium weighs about 0.2 milligrams (0.0031 gr).[198])"
    Again, a bit unusual to have a sentence entirely within brackets
  • "This was another possible route to an atomic bomb, especially if it turned out that uranium-233 could be more easily separated from thorium than plutonium from uranium."
    We haven't mentioned plutonium before or why it would need to be separated from uranium
    check Plutonium has been mentioned. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Nonetheless, the Combined Development Trust set out to secure a large portion of it."
    Feels a strange point to leave the Thorium section on. Did they achieve anything?
    It's a long story, but outside the scope of the the article, which ends with the Manhattan Project on 1 January 1947. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Over the course of 1943-1947, Murray Hill Area staff would conduct literature and field surveys of dozens of countries to assess their uranium and thorium resources."
    In a caption, could probably do with a citation as not directly supported by the main text
    There is a citation on the map itself. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • I couldn't immediately see where the following were supported by the article:
    "Beyond their immediate wartime needs, the American and British governments attempted to control as much of the world's uranium deposits as possible."
    check Added a bit more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's everything I picked up on the prose. Excellent article with lots of interesting information and a pleasure to read - Dumelow (talk) 07:16, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your replies, it's a support from me on the prose. If you take this to FAC feel free to give me a nudge, it's be a pleasure to review it again - Dumelow (talk) 05:00, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HF

I hope to be able to get to this over the weekend. Hog Farm Talk 02:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for the United States section; stopping for the evening. Hog Farm Talk 01:49, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Link heavy water at the first mention insead of the second?
  • "Manhattan District (1947a). Feed Materials and Special Procurement (PDF). Manhattan District History, Book VII: Feed Materials, Special Procurement, and Geographical Exploration [uranium]. Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.: Manhattan District. Retrieved 16 February 2025." - link appears to no longer work. Is this content only available in certain geograhpic areas?
    check Just the Internet Archive being unreliable. Replaced archive.org link with
  • "While not as nasty as uranium hexafluoride, uranium tetrachloride is hygroscopic," - the article has not mentioend uranium hexaflouride as problematic to handle, instead saying that about uranium oxyflouride
    From the S-50 (Manhattan Project) article:

    On 2 September 1944, SED Private Arnold Kramish, and two civilians, Peter N. Bragg, Jr., an NRL chemical engineer, and Douglas P. Meigs, a Fercleve employee, were working in a transfer room when a 600-pound (270 kg) cylinder of uranium hexafluoride exploded, rupturing nearby steam pipes. The steam reacted with the uranium hexafluoride to create hydrofluoric acid, and the three men were badly burned. Private John D. Hoffman ran through the toxic cloud to rescue them, but Bragg and Meigs died from their injuries. Another eleven men, including Kramish and four other soldiers, were injured but recovered. Hoffman, who suffered burns, was awarded the Soldier's Medal, the United States Army's highest award for an act of valor in a non-combat situation, and the only one awarded to a member of the Manhattan District. Bragg was posthumously awarded the Navy Meritorious Civilian Service Award on 21 June 1993.

    Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Hog Farm Talk 23:07, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • " this could be managed because the carbide formed only where the two touched" - I think what the carbide was needs to be lightly glossed; the only other mentions of carbide in the article are in the name Union Carbide
    check Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's it for the first pass. Hog Farm Talk 01:43, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good work; supporting. Hog Farm Talk 13:50, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on sourcing

Got a request on my talk page, which I am hereby answering. What makes https://waterfrontalliance.org/2020/06/11/from-rumor-to-reality-staten-islands-radioactive-history/, The Walrus and https://republicofmining.com/2016/09/14/port-radiums-eldorado-the-mine-that-shook-the-world-by-ronald-a-keith-macleans-magazine-november-15-1945/ a reliable source? Do you have the review of "Pan Am at War: How the Airline Secretly Helped America Fight World War II" - the publisher raises some questions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:15, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Waterfront Alliance is a nonprofit organization that works to influence the development and use of the waterfront, shoreline, and connected upland areas of the Port of New York and New Jersey and the New York–New Jersey Harbor Estuary.
  • The Walrus is an independent, nonprofit Canadian media organization that produces an eight-issue-per-year magazine and online editorial content that includes current affairs.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:11, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, for me the link to the review was going to a completely different topic. Viz Waterfront Alliance, I don't think that alone makes it a reliable source - are they commonly cited by other parties? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:22, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The doi works for me. It should take you to here. Google gives me a lot of hits on Waterfront Alliance. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:53, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Google Books includes a lot of non-reliable sources, so that alone wouldn't prove much. That doi works correctly for me, true. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:01, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: The Waterfront Alliance source is only used in footnote 35. It was there to provide the street address of the warehouse, but this was removed in response to a suggestion by Hog Farm (see above). So the text is now entirely supported by footnote 33, and footnote 35 could be removed if you think that is warranted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:57, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Everything else looks to be in good order. Parsecboy (talk) 01:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by Adam Cuerden

Right. The images fall into a few categories:

US Federal Government images
These are clearly fine to use. Many are scanned from a book, but I think we can presume Hawkeye took precautions there. This includes Department of Energy, documentary photos from the HAER project, etc. The Ames National Lab images, e.g. File:Ames Process pressure vessel lower.jpg, are only worth pointing out because they additionally have OTRS documentation (this is a good thing).
iRocks.com content
We have a OTRS for this. Fine.
Normal Wikimedian created things
E.g. File:Bowling_Green_NYC_Feb_2020_07.jpg. No issues.
Canadian works early enough to be clearly out of copyright.
Notes
  • File:Blenda_smolista2.jpg lacks a date, which seems to have more to do with being from the early days of Wikipedia than anything problematic.
  • File:Port_Radium_in_1936.jpg and File:Radium Queen at the Fort Fitzgerald docks, July 1, 1937.jpg have a deadlink for the source. This is, sadly, pretty normal, and there's no reason to doubt their province, date, or copyright status.
  • User:Chemolunatic did a lot of the pictures of chemicals in the article. He doesn't seem to have done much on Wikipedia other than this, which is a little worrying. Has a couple dozen edits to German Wikipedia. Wouldn't imagine the number of people who can just... photograph uranium-contaning chemicals is high, but I think challenging these would be rather paranoid.
Problems
  • File:Edgar Sengier receiving the Medal of Merit.jpg was not created by the Atomic Heritage Foundation. They were founded in 2002. Documentation on this one needs improved.
    Groves wrote:

    It was a distinct pleasure for me after the war to recommend the award of the Medal of Merit, the highest civilian award made by our government, to Edgar Sengier for his great services to the United States, to Belgium and the free world in making available to us adequate supplies of Belgian Congo uranium. It was also my pleasure to present this award at a ceremony in my office in Washington. Security restrictions had not yet been lifted on this phase of the MED operations and the ceremony was private and unpublicized.

    — Groves, L. (1962). Now It Can Be Told: The Story of the Manhattan Project, p. 178

  • I am aware there is a learning curve to using any new archive. I cannot follow the chain of documentation from to the licensing at File:Alsos_mealtime.jpg. But this is probably unfamiliarity with the subject more than anything else.
    One of the great things about the Manhattan Project was that they documented everything. Sergeant Malcolm “Mickey” Thurgood (1914-1987) was assigned as a photographer with the Alsos Mission. See . I have marked the images as PD-USGov-Army. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:46, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, with this fix I think both are resolved, and I'd pass this. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 08:31, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm getting married soon so can't promise how much I can update this, so feel free to presume that I would have assented were I active if the discussion reaches that point. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:30, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. I will assume "afraid" was a typo. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:36, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Well, afraid that will mean I will be less help here. Not afraid of the marriage. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 09:45, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Manhattan_Project_feed_materials_program&oldid=1325002917"