![]() | William James Wanless was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 6, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Miraj township of Wanlesswadi is named for
William James Wanless, who founded the first missionary medical school in
India? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is currently being discussed on Talk:John Rabe. -- . Shlok talk . 20:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
I have considerably pared down the "See also" section on this page, as it was clear that many of the links had no cirect relevance to either the events in Nanking in general, or Rabe in particular. William James Wanless, for example, seems to have never even set foot in China, yet on his page there are many of the same exceptionally tenuous links. Nick Cooper ( talk) 23:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
OK, let's slow down. I see that HarryZilber restored the disputed list of "see also" links to William James Wanless - even as I was deleting it from the other articles. Please let's not get into an edit war. Let's not make any more additions or deletions until we resolve the question. Let's resolve it here at this discussion page, or if we can't reach agreement, let's ask for a Wikipedia:Third opinion. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
My summary of the question at dispute here:
-- MelanieN ( talk) 17:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
No connection with the subject- Deleting ". John Rabe " from see also as he who had nothing to do with Sir Wanless or his work , Mr. John Rabe was a businessman and he work in war in relation to his business as businessman, whereas Dr. Sir Wanless was a medical missionaries providing quality health care to all irrespective of caste, creed, religion or financial means and living only on his missionary's salary sent by the Bryn Mawr Presbyterian Church, while donating his personal staff salary to the mission. Very different to connection with the subject Business of mr. John Rabe.
Dr. Sir Wanless was working for:
Not as a Business, nor as a businessman.
See [1] Medicine in India.-- . Shlok talk . 17:59, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
MelanieN: You're a hard one to satisify!.... quoting you: "Foreign humanitarians serving far from their homes"? Or is it more like "white people doing good things in Asia"?"
White people doing good things in Asia?? It almost sounds as though you have an underlying bias against 'white people' receiving credit for their good works. You should recheck your own work as one of the links you deleted was for Dwarkanath Kotnis who was Indian and would not be mistaken as a white westerner.
Aside from that, you've chosen to rewrite a Wikipedia guideline, without actual rewriting it, except above where you state: "Is it appropriate to use the "see also" section of a biography article to provide links to numerous other persons, whose activities or biography may be similar in some way to the subject of the article?"
As you probably know, 'peripherally' relates to 'periphery': "...an area lying beyond the strict limits of a thing". Adding a link to a like humanitarian in an article about a humanitarian complies to the guideline you're seeking to change without consensus, so I'd suggest it is you who is acting outside of Wikipedia's norms by deleting such edits (please, lets skip the semantics debate).
If you'd like to discuss the number of links that are appropriate to the article (yes, 40 would probably be too many), or who should be included as a 'like' humanitarian, I'm more than open to suggestions; however please do not redefine Wikipedia's operating guidelines and policies on your own since that would obviously lead to anarchy. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 17:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I was asked to provide an impartial peer review of the article.
In conclusion, I would take the later life information out of the biography section and put it in its own section towards the end of the article before the honours section. This fits within the chronological order of his life and then you aren't having him die before he begins his career. I would also expand this information as much as possible. It says his first wife died, did he have a second? I don't recall reading that, though I may have missed it. We know he had one son, did he have any other children? Overall it's a good article about an amazing man. Thank you for your work. H1nkles ( talk) citius altius fortius 17:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: LK ( talk) 06:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Overall, I am impressed with the comprehensiveness of this article, and the density of the citations. Detailed review below using the Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria template for reviewing. LK ( talk) 03:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
It's been nearly a month, unless there is some answer to the points raised above (some of which have already been fixed), I'll have to (reluctantly) close this GA as 'failed'. LK ( talk) 07:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
For the second time, I have removed the inaccurate category of "recipients of honorary British knighthoods" and the inaccurate link to the Order of the British Empire. The citation for Sir William's knighthood from the London Gazette clearly establishes that he was created a substantive knight bachelor, not an honorary knight of the Order of the British Empire.-- Ibagli ( Talk) 05:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
![]() | William James Wanless was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 6, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Miraj township of Wanlesswadi is named for
William James Wanless, who founded the first missionary medical school in
India? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is currently being discussed on Talk:John Rabe. -- . Shlok talk . 20:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
I have considerably pared down the "See also" section on this page, as it was clear that many of the links had no cirect relevance to either the events in Nanking in general, or Rabe in particular. William James Wanless, for example, seems to have never even set foot in China, yet on his page there are many of the same exceptionally tenuous links. Nick Cooper ( talk) 23:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
OK, let's slow down. I see that HarryZilber restored the disputed list of "see also" links to William James Wanless - even as I was deleting it from the other articles. Please let's not get into an edit war. Let's not make any more additions or deletions until we resolve the question. Let's resolve it here at this discussion page, or if we can't reach agreement, let's ask for a Wikipedia:Third opinion. -- MelanieN ( talk) 17:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
My summary of the question at dispute here:
-- MelanieN ( talk) 17:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
No connection with the subject- Deleting ". John Rabe " from see also as he who had nothing to do with Sir Wanless or his work , Mr. John Rabe was a businessman and he work in war in relation to his business as businessman, whereas Dr. Sir Wanless was a medical missionaries providing quality health care to all irrespective of caste, creed, religion or financial means and living only on his missionary's salary sent by the Bryn Mawr Presbyterian Church, while donating his personal staff salary to the mission. Very different to connection with the subject Business of mr. John Rabe.
Dr. Sir Wanless was working for:
Not as a Business, nor as a businessman.
See [1] Medicine in India.-- . Shlok talk . 17:59, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
MelanieN: You're a hard one to satisify!.... quoting you: "Foreign humanitarians serving far from their homes"? Or is it more like "white people doing good things in Asia"?"
White people doing good things in Asia?? It almost sounds as though you have an underlying bias against 'white people' receiving credit for their good works. You should recheck your own work as one of the links you deleted was for Dwarkanath Kotnis who was Indian and would not be mistaken as a white westerner.
Aside from that, you've chosen to rewrite a Wikipedia guideline, without actual rewriting it, except above where you state: "Is it appropriate to use the "see also" section of a biography article to provide links to numerous other persons, whose activities or biography may be similar in some way to the subject of the article?"
As you probably know, 'peripherally' relates to 'periphery': "...an area lying beyond the strict limits of a thing". Adding a link to a like humanitarian in an article about a humanitarian complies to the guideline you're seeking to change without consensus, so I'd suggest it is you who is acting outside of Wikipedia's norms by deleting such edits (please, lets skip the semantics debate).
If you'd like to discuss the number of links that are appropriate to the article (yes, 40 would probably be too many), or who should be included as a 'like' humanitarian, I'm more than open to suggestions; however please do not redefine Wikipedia's operating guidelines and policies on your own since that would obviously lead to anarchy. Best: HarryZilber ( talk) 17:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
I was asked to provide an impartial peer review of the article.
In conclusion, I would take the later life information out of the biography section and put it in its own section towards the end of the article before the honours section. This fits within the chronological order of his life and then you aren't having him die before he begins his career. I would also expand this information as much as possible. It says his first wife died, did he have a second? I don't recall reading that, though I may have missed it. We know he had one son, did he have any other children? Overall it's a good article about an amazing man. Thank you for your work. H1nkles ( talk) citius altius fortius 17:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: LK ( talk) 06:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Overall, I am impressed with the comprehensiveness of this article, and the density of the citations. Detailed review below using the Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria template for reviewing. LK ( talk) 03:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
It's been nearly a month, unless there is some answer to the points raised above (some of which have already been fixed), I'll have to (reluctantly) close this GA as 'failed'. LK ( talk) 07:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
For the second time, I have removed the inaccurate category of "recipients of honorary British knighthoods" and the inaccurate link to the Order of the British Empire. The citation for Sir William's knighthood from the London Gazette clearly establishes that he was created a substantive knight bachelor, not an honorary knight of the Order of the British Empire.-- Ibagli ( Talk) 05:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)