User:Brrgdw/sandbox

Peer Review by Doran Grieshaber
The article is neutral and does not give biased to any viewpoint. Many of the additions seem like very pertinent information, and give insight to achievements in her life that were not present in the original article. However, you may want to keep your edits in chronological order. Some additions talk about events that occur in the 1870s, then the next paragraph jumps back to 1862. I’m not sure what all the letters at the beginning of your citations are from, you may want to reformat those. Other than formatting, the citations seem like they come from reliable sources. The additions also seem heavily based on one or two sources. I’m not sure if there are just very limited sources on Rachel Bodley, but getting different sources could help vary this. Although it is a very short article, I think there is potential to break the article up into multiple sections rather than just “Life”. If a little more information could be found, it could be broken into something such as “Early Life” and “Career” or headings along those lines. Overall, it seems that the edits have largely improved the article and added a lot of information. I think that the biggest task now would be to reformat the article to flow better and potentially find other sources. DGrieshaber (talk) 15:42, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Response to Peer Review
The point about chronological order is an important criticism that needs to be implemented. It is one that will easily be combined with the point about breaking her article into smaller subsections. THe order of the subsections would be roughly chronological, unless there is a clear logical reason for them not to be, and the information presented within each section would be in clear chronological order. Some subsections that could be added are Early Life, Education, Career, Teaching, and Professional Societies.

The letters at the beginning of the citations are the hyperlinks to each place that source was cited in the article. As such, they are necessary and cannot be reformatted. However, the length of the letter strings can be lessened by spreading the citations between more sources. The two that are currently being used are the sources that are the easiest to access and seem the most reliable, but I can probably find more sources to cite.

New Source (not my citation): https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Woman_of_the_Century/Rachel_L_Bodley

Early Life
Born 1831 in Cincinnati, Ohio, Bodley was the eldest daughter of a Presbyterian carpenter and pattern maker Anthony Prichard Bodley and teacher Rebecca Wilson Bodley (née Talbot).

Education
From the age of attended the primary school which her mother ran. In 1844, she entered the Wesleyan Female College in Cincinnati and graduated at age 18 in 1849. She served as an assistant teacher at Wesleyan until 1860, eventually rising to preceptor in the college studies department. Upon leaving Wesleyan, Bodley moved to Philadelphia where she entered the Polytechnic College of Pennsylvania to study advanced chemistry and physics. She also studied anatomy and physiology at the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania. In 1871, Wesleyan Female College awarded her an honorary Master of Arts degree. Later, in 1876, she was presented with an honorary M.D. by the Women's Medical College, where she was Dean of the Faculty.

In 1862, Bodley became a professor of natural sciences at the Cincinnati Female Seminary. She took on the organization of the herbarium which had been donated to the Seminary by the heirs of Joseph Clark (1823-1858). It was an extensive collection of local flora, and the guide to the collection which Bodley compiled, printed in 1865, also served as a guide to plants in the Cincinnati area.

In 1865, she left the Cincinnati Female Seminary to become the Chair of Chemistry and Toxicology at the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania, where she would spend the rest of her career. She was the first woman to hold the title Professor of Chemistry at a medical school. She presided over the graduation of Anandi Gopal Joshi, one of the first Hindu women to obtain a degree in Western medicine (the other being Kadambini Ganguly). The event was witnessed by Pandita Ramabai and she was congratulated by Queen Victoria. Bodley later wrote an introduction to Pandita Ramabai's book The High-Caste Hindu Woman (1887).

Bodley became a member of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (presently Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University) in 1871. In 1876, she helped to found the American Chemical Society of New York City, becoming chapter's first female member, in addition to being a charter member. She also joined the New York Academy of Sciences at that time.

Bodley was director of the twenty-ninth school section in Philadelphia from 1882 to 1885. In 1887, she was elected to a second 3 year term as director, but it was cut short by her death in 1888.

Rachel Bodley died of heart failure on June 15, 1888.

Societies/notable organizations and groups
1864: State Historical Society of Wisconsin


 * 1) 1871: Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia (inducted into _ because of work on x, etc)


 * 1) * 1871: Honorary A.M. from Wesleyan Female College

1873: Cincinnati Society of Natural History

1873-74: Joseph Priestley Centennial Commemoration


 * 1) 1876: New York Academy of Sciences

1876: American Chemical Society of New York City - charter member, first woman


 * 1) * 1876: honorary M.D. from Woman's Medical College of PA

1880: Franklin Institute of Philadelphia

1882: Educational Society of Philadelphia


 * 1) ** 1882-85 or 1884-87 agree on 87-88 : Philadelphia board of Public Education (two 3 year terms, died 1 year into second term) as director of 29th school district - one of the first women directors

1883: Board of Public Charities of the State of PA - school inspector

1885: founded Christian Association at Woman's Medical College of PA - housed permanently in Brinton Hall

* education/degrees

** conflicting sources

Evaluating the Article

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Everything seems to be relevant, but almost every sentence is a standalone noteworthy topic, which makes the article very choppy and difficult to read.


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

The information does not seem to be out of date, but there is a lot of missing information. For example, other than the date in the sidebar bio, nothing is mentioned about her death.


 * What else could be improved?

Her entire article, other than the introduction, is one section "Life" that needs to be broken into smaller sections, in addition to adding more topics such as "Education", "Teaching Career", or one about her role as the Dean of the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania.


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

It seems so. Quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be enough information to determine bias.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

Not that I can particularly tell, but I don't know enough about her to know if there are "over/underrepresented" viewpoints.


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

The citation numbers link to the bottom of the page, but none of the references have links in them, except to ISBN numbers


 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

There are many claims and facts listed throughout the article that do not have a corresponding citation, for example, the claim that she was the first female chemistry professor at a medical school. Most of the referenced sources seem to be biographical dictionaries or encyclopedias of women scientists, so they would appear to be neutral sources, but I am not sure of the legitimacy of citing an encyclopedia page when writing an encyclopedia page.

Checking the Talk Page

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

There appears to be no activity on the talk page


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is rated as start-class, low importance and is part of the WikiProjects for Biography / Science and Academia, Women scientists, and Pennsylvania


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

The article lists where she was and her titles at different times, but is very sparse on what she did and how it was impactful. There is nothing about the wider context of her being one of the first women in her field and any difficulties and prejudices she would have faced because of it.