Talk:Jean-Nicolas Corvisart

Untitled
Hi Aesisenstadt1, Ssimko1, and Mpatel58. Kennyling96, Samuelkou, and I (Brendanjhong) have talked with each other and have decided to collaborate and write about Corvisart for our assignment. We assigned Corvisart as our only topic, and I see that you three have assigned yourself to multiple topics. We were wondering if you still want to write about Corvisart. The three of us would like to start writing the article, and it would be convenient if we knew your status before we started. I think having six people on one article is a little overwhelming. Brendanjhong (talk) 03:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Brendan, Mpatel58 and I also decided to collaborate for Corvisart. The other assignments you see were the basic editing demos from earlier in the semester. I certainly would still like to write on Corvisart, since I have done research on the topic already and looked at him early last week when I didn't expect this to be an issue. Perhaps we can work on subdividing him and figure out where we want to work as a group. I'm sure there's a way we can make this work, as long as we figure out categories early and allow ample time for us all to make sure there's no overlap. Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Just looking at the email from Prof Comfort. What if we did formal training, auscultation, time with napoleon, medical training, and idk what else. Maybe those could have subcategories though? Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 14:17, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Okay, (sorry for spam). but I looked through sources today and I think we could do a formal/medical training, early life, auscultation, legacy/contributions, relationship to Paris medicine/work at la charitie the hospital, and someone could work on exploring his publications. Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * How many sources have you found? I think we need a total of 15 different sources between all five of us. Brendanjhong (talk) 00:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * So far I've found 13 through JSTOR, Gale encyclo, and some databases on Sheridan. I have a book coming in also, and there seem to be some others out there also Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 03:28, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh wait, there's also some in the Sci and Practice textbook we have and I already found 2 other articles so that's like 15 Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 03:29, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi all. Brendanjhong, Samuelkou, and I (Kennyling96) have chosen different topics and will not be working on Corvisart. Kennyling96 (talk) 16:24, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm going to do medical legacy/contributions, for other people working on this page Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 19:45, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm going to do early life Samuelkou(talk)


 * I'm going to expand on his role as Napoleon's physician and fill in some gaps in your 'biography'. Mpatel58 (talk)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aeisenstadt1, Ssimko1, Samuelkou, Mpatel58. Peer reviewers: Emarti84.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Critique
A well-structured article and clearly organized article. Made a few edits under "Biography," adding links to the wiki articles on significant terms and figures that were referred to. Prior to that there were no links. There is a lack of variety in sources in the "As Napoleon's Physician" section. I suggest backing up claims with more sources rather than repeatedly referencing a single source. There may be a slight confusion in the article as well. In "Biography," it is mentioned that Corvisart dies 4 months after Napoleon. In the following section, however, it is suggested that Corvisart dies before Napolean, and the quality of physician care following Corvisart changed: "Upon Corvisart's death and Napoleon's eventual decline in health, a marked difference was noted in efficacy of care and treatment style among the doctors who assumed the post as Napoleon's physicians." Please clarify this apparent contradiction. Also, consider removing the term "ironically" in the last sentence of the Biography section. This introduces an element of subjective evaluation on the author's part.

The last paragraph in the "Legacy" section lacks sources. Please add.

Overall, a thorough analysis and an informative read. Emarti84 (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your critique and review of this article. I misread the source that you referenced in the 'As Napoleon's Physician' portion of the article, which is the portion that I wrote. I have corrected the statement--the passage I was reading from stated that the doctors who assumed the 'governmental physician' or 'chief physician' role upon Corvisart's death were not as competent as he etc. Unfortunately, the English sources that reference Corvisart are limited, but I will continue to try to find additional sources to provide variety and support for this portion of the article. Again, thank you for your comments and very relevant suggestions. Mpatel58 (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! I went in and ended up taking out the last Legacy paragraph, because I realized it was mostly a summary conclusion paragraph instead of providing factual information.Aeisenstadt1 (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I will take out the word ironically. I will also fix the contradiction of the dates that both Corvisart and Napolean died. Samuelkou (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)