Jump to content

Talk:Stafford L. Warren

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleStafford L. Warren 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
March 28, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 25, 2011.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Stafford L. Warren invented the mammogram?

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Stafford L. Warren/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article's nomination for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    • Rochester University. Could we get a little more information about his invention of the mammogram? This is an important development in the history of cancer diagnosis/treatment, and it seems like it should be given a little more than a stubby paragraph in the article about its inventor.
    • Manhattan Project image caption, "with the Bikini Island" Should either be plural islands or remove the "the".
      • Done checkY
    • Manhattan Project, "Kirk was furious and when told that Warren was the man the district had in mind to commission as a colonel, and apparently familiar with Warren's work only from his use of radiation to treat venereal disease". First, why was he furious? Second, the article prior to this mentions nothing about radiation to treat venereal disease, so this is an abrupt introduction to the subject.
    • Manhattan Project, "here were 62 fatalities and 3,879," 3,879 what?
    • Manhattan Project, "Fortunately, no problems arose." No problems arose while he slept, or no problems arose from having someone on duty who hadn't slept for two days?
    • Manhattan Project. Some transition would be nice between the discussion of Japan and the discussion of Operation Crossroads. As currently written, it's an abrupt jump.
    • Manhattan Project, "he was replaced by Dr Shields Warren." Any relation?
    • University of California, "the Governor of California, Earl Warren." Again, any relation?
    • University of California, "Against some influential opposition," Can you give any details about this opposition? Why was Warren successful?
      • I don't know. It isn't in my sources. If I was going to take the article further, I'd have to dig out the 1,000 page oral history transcript, but its in the University of California in Los Angeles. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK. If you take this to FAC, this information is needed (IMO) for the article to be "comprehensive". However, I think that even without the information the "broadness" criteria at GAN is met. Dana boomer (talk) 13:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • University of California, "He strove to integrate not the structures but the faculty with other departments of the university." What?
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • What makes Ref #6 (Scienceheroes) a reliable ref?
      • I only used it to indicate that it was well known. Deleted. checkY
    • What makes Ref #21 (Williamlongmire.org) a reliable ref?
      • I referenced Longmire's University of California obituary therein. It was only used for a couple of words, to establish who hired him. Do you want it redacted? Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • At this point I'm going to say that it can be left, since it does cite its sources. However, if you take the article to FAC it would probably be best to replace it, since it most likely doesn't meet the high-quality reliable source criteria at FAC.
    • Rochester University, "That year he published perhaps his most influential paper, entitled "A Roentgenologic Study of the Breast"". This is sourced to the paper itself, which is not a reliable source for it being his "most influential paper".
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    • There are a few spots that I would like to see fleshed out more. These are detailed above in the prose section.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Overall a nice article, but a few questions about prose, completeness and references. I am placing the article on hold to allow time for these to be addressed. Dana boomer (talk) 20:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

non-consensual human experimentation programs

[edit]

Dr. Stafford Warren‘s Manhattan Project research included overseeing research at the University of Rochester Medical Center, from 1945–1947 that involved injecting plutonium and uranium into 17 patients without their knowledge.

Wikipedia has an article about *The Plutonium Files*, the book that uncovered the experiment. Tgat article also omits mention of Stafford Warren.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Plutonium_Files 2603:7081:1601:F708:614E:8C6D:A3E1:C9FB (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read the book? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:37, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]