Talk:American Anthropometric Society/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 19:22, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The article is remarkably improved from its stubby state for many years, good work!

Lead

Admirably clear, good writing.

History

Wikilink pseudoscience.
- done Dwkaminski (talk) 14:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Dercum, however, pathologist" -> "Dercum. Pathologist"
- made change Dwkaminski (talk) 14:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"the society contained" " the society possessed"
- made change Dwkaminski (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"approximately 50" and "only two dozen" don't tally. Needs a word of explanation.
- added copy that the approximately 50 brains of non-eminent persons were not transferred to the Wistar Institute. Dwkaminski (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis of brains

Edward Anthony Spitzka, M.D., professor of anatomy at Jefferson Medical College, published a paper on his study of six brains - please drop the glosses, they aren't helpful to the reader. Suggest "Edward A. Spitzka published a paper on six brains" is all that's needed here.
- made change Dwkaminski (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In Spitzka's analysis: this comes across as gossip (leaving aside how the numbers add up, or don't). Suggest we drop this.
- dropped comments about number of damaged brains Dwkaminski (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Spitzka claimed in his analysis" -> "Spitzka claimed".
- made change Dwkaminski (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"They observed no significant differences in his brain" - differences from what?
- Changed to "they observed no unusual characteristics in the surface of his brain" and "no significant differences were observed between his brain and those of less eminent persons" Dwkaminski (talk) 14:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"but not much else." -> ", or of anything else of significance." (or something of that sort).
- changed to "but nothing else of scientific interest" Dwkaminski (talk) 14:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Walt Whitman's brain

This section stands out as a bit of fun, a bit of gossip, and I'm afraid a bit of a WP:COATRACK, a diversion which might be somewhat relevant to Walt Whitman (but gossipy even there), and somewhat more, perhaps to Frankenstein (1931 film), but not very much to this article. I suggest we cut it down to a single short paragraph within the 'Analysis of brains' section; the current section occupies about a third of the main text (not counting lead and refs), which is clearly WP:UNDUE in this context, a serious institution.
- deleted Walt Whitman's brain section - moved one paragraph to Analysis of brains section under the discussion of Spitzka's paper Dwkaminski (talk) 14:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notable donors

Allen, Donaldson, Leidy, and Osler are uncited.
- added references for all notable donors listed Dwkaminski (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Stanley Finger is listed as a source but is not the source of anything in the article. Use it or remove it?
- Removed Finger source Dwkaminski (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources are clearly relevant and verify the claims made of them.

Images

The only image is of the Wistar institute, from Commons. It seems to be a valid user-created CC-by-SA image.

Summary

Well, that's about it from me, just a few comments which I hope will be quick to fix. Good work and I look forward to seeing this at GA soon. It would be helpful if you could mark "Done" or something after each item so I can see when you feel you've addressed the comments. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:52, 5 January 2024 (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.