User:Mjcowan20/OLES2129
Tutorial 2
Activity 1: Talk:Kinga Preis
This page is a part of 3 projects:
- WikiProject Biography / Actors and Filmmakers
In the first 2 it has been labelled as a stub, in the latter it is a stub of low importance. Immediately the page leaves much to be desired as it does not complete the WikiProject Biography / Actors and Filmmakers infobox template. While there are aspects of the Actor's life which could be expanded on (such as personal life, early life etc.), most notably the filmography consists of a list. This is inconsistent with the advice of the Actors and Filmmakers project advice. It leaves out essential information such as the actor's role in each film. If an 'A' requires that 'A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting', I think these areas might be improved.
Activity 2: Talk:Kenny Sinclair
On this page I added an image request, as the biography template is lacking one and any other images that may greatly assist the page, to improve the quality of the page
Tutorial 3
Anon 3 (1832), "Destruction of a Theatre of Anatomy, London, Saturday, December 31, 1831.", The Lancet, Mills, Jowett, and Mills (435), doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)94383-7
Scholarship
This article was submitted to The Lancet journal anonymously and published in 1831. The journal is an exceptionally well respected peer-reviewed journal and it is currently ranked second in the world for General and Internal Medicine.[1] Even in the 1830s, The Lancet had a high circulation of about 4,000.[2] While the author is not disclosed, it is likely that this source had a high level of scholarship given the status of the journal and the scholarly character of the contemporaneous editors. The event in question, a public riot and arson in Aberdeen, is corroborated by a number of sources.[3][4][5]
Context
The source was published in the December of 1831, only a week after the event. The article was designed to be circulated amongst the readership of the Journal, primarily composed of the medical scholarship. Thus, the article was designed to be read by the persecuted group in the Riot. This was a time when studying human remains was highly controversial, the Anatomy Act had not yet been introduced and Burke and Hare had been convicted of their murders only two years prior. The intention of the article was therefore to articulate the civil unrest and offence to the medical community in relation to the riot.
Content
The article naturally exaggerates the debate, turning it into a classist and intellectual debate that promotes the then Bill that would become the Anatomy Act 1832 (UK). The article is one of biased fact initially that evolves into an opinion piece on social commentary. It is well articulated and verbose with an expansive vocabulary - it is a pleasure to read.
- ^ "The Lancet". Elsevier. 17 March 2020.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ Howard-Jones, Norman (1974-01-01), "The Life and Times of Thomas Wakley. S. SQUIRE SPRIGGE, Huntington, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co., New York, 1974, 509 pp, facsimile of 1899 ed.", Clio Medica. Acta Academiae Internationalis Historiae Medicinae. Vol. 9, Brill | Rodopi, ISBN 978-90-04-41821-9, retrieved 2020-03-17
- ^ "RIOT AT ABERDEEN". Sydney Monitor (NSW : 1828 - 1838). 1832-07-07. p. 3. Retrieved 2020-03-17.
- ^ Humphries, E (2014). "Murder, mortsafes and Moir: a medical student looks at anatomy teaching in Aberdeen" (PDF). J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 44: 67–71.
{{cite journal}}: line feed character in|title=at position 46 (help) - ^ Fraser, W. Hamish; Lee, Clive Howard (2000). Aberdeen, 1800-2000: A New History. Dundurn. ISBN 978-1-86232-108-3.