Talk:William Gull

From Hell paragraph
I have amended this slightly because as it stood, the spoiler warning appeared even before the title of the work it applied to was mentioned, which is a bit useless. Also the paragraph seemed to say that the idea that Gull was disturbed following strokes was invented for the film adaptation, when in fact it is clearly in the graphic novel. I have however left the latter bit untouched because I have not seen the film. Thermaland 15:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Removal/rewrite
Hi! I am personal unable to review this, so could please anyone of you do so?  abf  /talk to me/  11:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Huh?
"Gull has been suggested as a suspect in the Jack the Ripper murders, related to an alleged royal/masonic conspiracy. At the time of the frenzied Whitechapel murders, Gull was in his seventies and already had suffered a stroke. For this reason, he features in a number of Ripper-related works of fiction:"

Was he featured because of the stroke? How many people who had strokes were featured in these works? How did he become a suspect and what does that have to do with his stroke? 4.249.3.107 (talk) 18:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Major rewrite
Having long thought that this article did not do justice to the subject, I have provided a major rewrite and trust this meets with approval. The main amendments are: (1) extended structured biography; (2) addition of a "contributions to medical science section, which describes Gull's significant medical work (entirely missing from the previous version); (3) rewrite of the Whitechapel Murders section, focussing on the history of how Gull came to be linked to these crimes; (4) removal of the fictional elements of the Whitechapel murders to a new "popular culture" section; (5) addition of photographs and graphics.

Achilver 04 January 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC).
 * Excellent. However, I think the Jack the Ripper stuff is to be quoted in the introduction, since the contemporary general public knows Gull mainly for this (however unfortunate that may be). JJ Georges (talk) 08:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I reluctantly agree with your comment about the Jack the Ripper stuff.

Achilver 05 January 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 19:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC).

Thomas A. Stowell (See Section 1970 - Criminologist Article (Thomas Stowell))
The article states that, "Stowell studied under Sir William Gull as a young man...". This statement is unsourced. If it is both correct that Sir William Gull died in 1890 and Stowell was born in 1885, Stowell must have been under five years old when he did these studies. CatherineEH (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I have deleted the statement, which as you correctly say, cannot be true. Thank you for pointing it out.Achilver (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 01 October 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move. Clear consensus that "William Gull" is the common name, and that this subject is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Cúchullain t/ c 14:33, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Sir William Gull, 1st Baronet → William Gull – Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC – The Traditionalist (talk) 21:23, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The two William Gulls look about the same importance to me. Curently page William Gull redirects to William Gull (disambiguation). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The famous and pioneering Victorian physician who was involved in Jack the Ripper's case is about the same importance with someone whose only notability was a five-year term as an MP and being the former's son?--The Traditionalist (talk) 23:16, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Moreover, the title of the son's article is Cameron Gull (because, apparently, he preferred using his middle name), which makes the disambiguation even more irrelevant.--The Traditionalist (talk) 23:17, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: The various Ripper theory books all seem to use William Withey Gull, perhaps to distinguish him from the younger Gull. I do not argue in favor of the claim that he was the Ripper - the idea that it was any independently notable person is nonsense - but enough of Wikipedia's readers will know him from the Ripper case that using his full name rather than just William Gull might be preferable. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 03:51, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Even without taking into account the coverage from being a Ripper suspect, the only other entry at the dab page was known as Cameron Gull, not William Gull. A hatnote will do.  IgnorantArmies  (talk)  04:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Common name, only person on WP with that name (his son being known as Cameron), and clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:27, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.