Talk:John Struthers (anatomist)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Good articleJohn Struthers (anatomist) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 18, 2012Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:John Struthers (anatomist)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 05:57, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will take on this review. At first inspection the article looks well written and I look forward to studying it in detail in the next couple of days. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:57, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I will be away 20 - 29 Dec, possibly with no access. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First reading

I will omit the lead section for the time being, coming back to it later, and start by looking in detail at the rest of the article.

  • Wikilink or explain - linen, bleacher, dresser, surgical clerk, physician, surgeon, dissection, ligament, connective tissue, foramen, vestigial, Bow Street Police Court, monograph, embalmed, Done.
  • "the marriage lasted until Alexander's death despite the large age difference, though with some difficulty."- What sort of difficulty? Done.
  • " ... as John also did." - I think you might omit that as it is self evident and interrupts the flow of commentary about his family. Done.
  • "Both his older brother James and his younger brother Alexander studied medicine, as John also did. James became a doctor at Leith; Alexander died of cholera while serving as a doctor in the Crimean War." - I would be inclined to move these two sentences to immediately before the information about his sisters. Done.
  • The section "Awards and honours" contains a number of single line paragraphs. It could do with being prosified a bit. Done.
  • "Struthers became popularly famous for his dissection of the "Tay Whale" — one of his largest specimens." I think that "popularly famous" could be improved, something like "known to the general public" Done.
  • "Only when the whale was too badly decomposed for further public exhibition was Struthers allowed to dissect the famous specimen on 25 January 1884." I think this sentence could be rearranged or rephrased as having the precise date at the end is a bit awkward. Since we don't know precisely when the whale aws stranded, do we need the precise date it was dissected? Done.
  • "To make matters worse, there were snow showers." - I think this is a bit casual and unencyclopaedic. Done.
  • The last few sentences of the Tay Whale section have "finally", "eventually" and "ultimately". These seem excessive. Done.
  • "Struthers was father-in-law of David Orme Masson who married his daughter Mary. He was grandfather of Sir James Irvine Orme Masson, and father-in-law of Simon Somerville Laurie, who married his daughter Lucy.[26][27]" - If you are going to mention these members of his family, you could indicate their specialities or reasons for being notable. Done.

The lead

Turning to the lead,

  • I think you should wikify and capitalise "Regius professor of anatomy" where it occurs in the lead. Done.
  • " ... the largest and finest specimens, including the skeletons of whales" - I think you should add "to dissect" Done.
  • " ...and alarming his colleagues with his single-minded quest for money and space for his collection." - I don't think you mention this in the body of the article. Done
  • You use "humpback whale" in the lead and "Humpback Whale" in the body of the article. Done.
  • " he was known for the large number of detailed and accurate papers and books that he wrote" - I'm not sure that this statement is made out in the article's contents. Done.
  • As I understand the guidelines, words should be wikified where they first occur and can be wikified in both lead and main text. Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A few more points

It's coming along nicely!

  • In the Infobox, some of the lines start with lower case letters. Done.
  • Also in the Infobox, it states that he had 5 sons and 4 daughters but in the article, it mentions "All three of their sons". Done.
  • Reference 21 looks inadequate. I guess you don't really need it at all because you give a fuller reference at the end of the quote. Done.
  • The humpback whale drawing could have a better caption. The name Megaptera longimana does not appear as a synonym of Megaptera novaeangliae but that article does state that Megaptera is a monotypic genus. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC) Done.[reply]
M. longimana was how it was described then, could well have been a not-properly-documented synonym. Since it was a monotypic genus, guess that means it must be a synonym of some status. Will try to fix these now, will be around until 10am tomo. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Prose is good
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. It complies with the MOS guidelines
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. It does
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Article is well referenced
2c. it contains no original research. Not as far as I am aware
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. A well-rounded article
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). It stays focussed
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. It fulfils this criterion
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Stable
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Images are appropriately licensed
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Yes
7. Overall assessment. Article meets the good article criteria

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Struthers (anatomist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:55, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Struthers (anatomist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:John_Struthers_(anatomist)"