This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2018
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Under the section Science/Mechanics a diagram is labelled "Cell structure of Cork by Robert Hooke" and should be labelled "Cell structure of Mimosa Leaves by Robert Hooke" Stteo (talk) 15:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Not done: According to the image information, the cells are from Suber, which is what cork comes from. It is not the cell structure of the leaves. RudolfRed (talk) 21:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Both dates belong to the period when Catholic countries used the Gregorian calendar but England still used the Julian one. Why is the birth date given in both calendars but the death date is given only in one calendar? The German Wikipedia lists the death date as 3 March 1702 (Julian)/ 14 March 1703 (Gregorian) (in this case, 1702 is not a mistake but the Annunciation style of the beginning if the year). Burzuchius (talk) 14:31, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
In Life and Works; Oxford, the paragraph on Boyle's law makes a claim that "Gunther suggests that Hooke probably made the observations and may well have developed the mathematics of Boyle's law. Regardless, it is clear that Hooke was a valued assistant to Boyle and the two retained a mutual high regard." without citation. This would require a , or for someone to find a source for this. --user:126.96.36.199 12:22, 21 November 2018
I am inclined to delete everything cited to Gunther since the only source provided is a privately printed book. IMO this fails WP:RS. Comments? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
@John Maynard Friedman:Robert Gunther was a curator at the Old Ashmolean, and founder of the History of Science Museum at Oxford. His privately published "early science in Oxford" includes facsimile copies of contemporaneous documents (including Waller's obituary) and is a gold standard source for historical analysis of the work of the founders of the Royal Society during their virtual exile to Oxford during the Protectorate. I have the five volumes of Gunther covering Hooke, my copy was previously owned by Margaret 'Espinasse, who wrote what I think was the first modern biography of Hooke. It's cited by 'Espinasse, Jardine, Gribbin, Inwood and I am pretty sure also Cooper, though my copies are packed away during building work right now. It would not be fanciful to suggest, from the dates and from Gunther's work in assembling the collections of scientific instruments, that he was the catalyst for the rediscovery of Hooke in the mid 20th Century after around 250 years of neglect. Guy (Help!) 11:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
@JzG: Yes I did eventually find some convincing info about him that made in pass the RS test, so I largely left the material intact, though moved some of it about. I also improved the citations to give a little of his background. How strange though, that he had to publish privately! "The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there". --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I have never really understood why he did this, since he would have had contacts at OUP, but I suspect interest in historical science was limited at the time, and also he wanted to curate his own work rather than submit it to editing. The books are on relatively cheap paper but are well typeset, have plentiful engravings and are professionally hardbound. Guy (Help!) 22:42, 23 December 2018 (UTC)