Template:Did you know nominations/Delphine Parrott

Delphine Parrott

 * ... that the first female professor at Glasgow University, Delphine Parrott, was especially good at vivisecting mice?
 * Reviewed: Talia Castellano

Created by Andrew Davidson (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk) at 23:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg article size, age and hook all ok - hook interesting. Await QPQ. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks to Cas Liber for the review. I've been busy clearing the decks so I can get away to Wikimania and have done the QPQ now.  The article has been getting good attention from Victuallers and others and so is continuing to develop well. Andrew Davidson (talk) 13:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg all good to go then. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This was closed, and then removed from Queue 5 after a discussion about the hook at WT:Did you know. The issues were: 1) Should it say "female" or "woman"? 2) Should the original hook be restored? 3) Should an entirely new hook be substituted? The hook at the time of removal was:
 * ALT1 ... that Delphine Parrott was Glasgow University's first woman professor?
 * and my suggested hook was:
 * ALT2 ... that Delphine Parrott conducted an experiment which demonstrated that removing a mouse's sense of smell prevented it from having a miscarriage when exposed to a strange male?
 * If ALT2 is to be used, Symbol redirect vote 4.svg it will have to be verified by someone else.  M AN d ARAX  •  XAЯA b ИA M  08:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * ALT1 is boring and ungrammatical as woman is a noun not an adjective.  ALT2 is inappropriate because the effect is primarily associated with Hilda Bruce and we shouldn't give undue emphasis to the subject's role.  The subject's outstanding talent seems to have been as an experimentalist - being able to perform delicate surgery on mice.  This still seems the most interesting and unusual aspect.  As the first hook was already reviewed and approved, why are we even having this discussion?  I am upset that, having exerted myself to get this done for a editathon, it is now mired in second-guessing.  Too many cooks... Andrew Davidson (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * After careful thought, I have to agree that the original is clearly the best hook, and for the reasons as set out above by Andrew. The change to woman from female was well-intentioned, but we should not be seen to be encouraging poor grammar, especially on our front page. My only possible improvement is that there could be a piped link to vivisection. Edwardx (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I still don't like the original hook, it goes into the "utterly trivial" department in my book - I mean, who needs to know that someone happened to be good at vivisecting mice? However, if there's a consensus to promote that hook, I won't stand in the way, but don't blame me if we get complaints about it. Gatoclass (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I broke a bone in my hand recently. This experience has opened my eyes to the importance of manual dexterity and fine surgery.  Such skill is not trivial and the subject was recruited specifically for this expertise. Andrew Davidson (talk) 09:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Would the general reader even care whether woman or female is used, no matter what the correct way is? I know that this is an encyclopedia, but some random choice should be made once the other hook issues are resolved. This article has been approved and there is no good reason to drag out a discussion about the use of one word. SL93 (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I prefer "female" - "woman" sounds odd. I thought the hook was interesting. Maybe as I'd read she was a doctor (and not a vetinarian) - not sure but I was happy with the first hook. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:20, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, since you're the reviewer and you still agree with the creator, I see no reason why "woman" would be used. SL93 (talk) 11:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Re grammar: Andrew Davidson, Edwardx, et al., sorry, you are completely mistaken. “Woman professor” is not in any way ungrammatical. Nouns in apposition is perfectly normal, grammatical and common in English; just think car keys, office supplies, concert hall, coffee cup, desktop computer, bus pass . . . the list could go on forever. The issue is that women professors, women doctors, women lawyers and other women professionals are a recent enough phenomenon that the language with which to discuss them is still in a state of flux. Hopefully today in everyday usage we can just say surgeon, judge, etc., and nobody is shocked or surprised when she turns out to be a woman (or are we there yet? Glass (n.) ceiling (n.) anyone?). But we still need a way to talk about the brave women who blazed the trail. I’m sure Dr. Parrott would have had your guts for garters if you’d called her a female professor to her face - as would I. Awien (talk) 12:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ummm, okay. though "female" sounds marginally more natural to my ears, it is not enough to make a fuss over for mine. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry Awien, but we are not "completely mistaken". And those are all false analogies.  Think about it for a moment.  What if one was to write "man professor"?  Woman and man are nouns.  Female and male can be both nouns and adjectives.  Of course, we should all just refer to the job and ignore the gender.  BUT, Parrott is notable for being the first woman to be a professor at Glasgow University, and using "female" allows this to be expressed more concisely. The NYT covers this female vs woman debate quite well here. Edwardx (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The NYT article is a good find. It describes the competing usages as "neck and neck" and that's what I found using Google ngram.  That shows "female professor" to be the only usage in the 19th century.  "Woman professor" appears at the end of the 19th century and is then more popular in the 20th century but then "female professor" makes a big comeback and is currently in the lead again.  Anyway, as this seems to be mostly a matter of personal style or preference, I claim priority per WP:RETAIN: "When no English variety has been established and discussion cannot resolve the issue, the variety used in the first non-stub revision is considered the default." Andrew Davidson (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Edwardx, it is absolutely, completely, unequivocally wrong to claim that a noun modifying a noun is ungrammatical. It is perfectly grammatical. Period. All the rest is usage, connotation, and preference. Andrew Davidson, if we have to defer to policy to resolve this, so be it. Awien (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Reapproving original hook (which I had originally promoted and prefer to ALT1); striking ALT1 and ALT2 due to objections from the nominators. Both the inclusion of the vivisection and the use of "female" over "woman" seem to be the consensus choices, with only one opposing opinion each. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)