User:HeavenlyNova/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Marie_Meurdrac


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

Everything seems pretty relevant, however it focuses on her book that she published in 1656 a lot more than anything else. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of information about anything except that book.


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

The article appears to be neutral. There are no claims or frames that appear biased.


 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?

Yes, the viewpoints that are over represented are when the article focuses heavily on her book instead of her life and what else she worked on during her time as an alchemist/chemist.


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

The links do work for the citations given. They support the claims in the article well. Are there anymore citations that could be used or added? Maybe ones that give a further in depth to her life?


 * 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?

Each fact is referenced correctly and they are all reliable. These sources are also neutral. Most of these focus on her book rather than what happened between 1625-1656.


 * Is any information out of date?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

Most of her life isn’t included in her article. Between 1625-1656, there’s nothing as to what was going on in her life. Is there any more information about what she did in those years that are missing? Did she write any other books or publications?


 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

There isn’t much on the talk page for this article other than the year of her published book was changed and two links were wanted to be added. There is nothing on the talk page after the beginning of 2018.


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

The article is rated C-class, low-importance. The article is part of three WikiProjects: Biography/Science and Academia, Women scientists, and Women’s History.


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

The way that Wikipedia discusses this topic is different because Wikipedia only discusses a small portion of her life before focusing heavily on the book she had published instead of discussing what she did in the fields of alchemy and chemistry, rather than just her book.

References and Notes

 * Why did you choose it? What's missing? What do you want to add?
 * Look up sources and start putting the list in your sandbox
 * If we have time, start adding to the article's talk page
 * Apotheker, Jan; Sarkadi, Livia Simon; Moreau, Nicole J. (2011) European Women in Chemistry.
 * Tosi, Lucia (2001) Marie Meurdrac: Paracelsian Chemist and Feminist.
 * Sentences for editing article: Meurdrac's treatise was one of the first works on Chemistry to be written by a women.

Play
Marie Meurdrac's book, Le Chymie charitable et facile, en faveur de dames, interested Molière, who based his comedy, Les Femmes Savantes, on it. The evidence given in Les Femmes Savantes backs up the fact that Meurdrac most likely was the first woman in chemistry. This satire play highlighted the women who devoted the majority of their time to their experiments and academics. However, the play mentions subjects such as physics, mathematics, and astronomy, and does not mention chemistry.

Personal Life
Meurdrac thought that femininity was important for women to have. Thus, she wanted to teach other women to preserve the essence of feminism in their time.

Marie had a younger sister, Catherine Meurdrac (b.1613), who later became Madame de La Guette and authored Memiors. She was the daughter of Vincent Meurdrac (1595-1650) and Elisabeth Dovet (d. 1636). Historian Lucia Tosi described Meurdrac as the first woman to publish a book on early chemistry or alchemy. Marie Meurdrac was reluctant to write, concerned about criticism from those who didn't believe women should receive an education.

Career
Meurdrac taught herself chemistry using works and experiments from other scientists. She did her own experiments and read theoretical works on alchemy and chemistry. In her self teaching, she covered items such as lab techniques, properties of medicines, and cosmetics. In her work, she also had a table of weights and 106 alchemical symbols.

Peer Review by Elizabeth Powell (enpzmf)
I think the draft is beginning to give Marie more life than the original article, definitely headed in the right direction. The last sentence in the “personal life” section is very clear and well-worded.

Changes I would suggest are really just rewording of some sentences. For example, the first sentence in the “career in chemistry” section is repetitive, so you could just say “Meurdrac also taught herself chemistry”. Simple edits like this just let each sentence flow into the next better, making the article easier to read.

The most important thing you could do to improve the article is maybe put in more citations (both wiki and other sources) where you can. Remember other wiki pages can be linked too, so if there is something you talk about that someone may need to know more about in order to understand what you’re saying better, those can be useful.

I did notice the use of outside sources could be more robust (although I know that’s difficult), and that is applicable to my own article as well. Keep up the good work ya’ll are doing great :)

Peer Review Response
I wasn't aware that the sentence in "career in chemistry" was repetitive, so thank you for pointing that out. I also appreciate the advice to changing some sentences so they're more simple and easier to read. I will put more citations in the article as well as more substance in these paragraphs. I need to look for a few more sources to be able to add more citations first. I will also look into linking other wiki pages, like Meurdrac's sister's wiki page could be linked. I agree that linking wiki pages for our article would be helpful for the reader and we will look into adding that as well as more citations/refereces. Thank you for the advice!

I added a citation from the French wikipedia page on Meurdrac and added links to a few related articles. Ouchlula (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Peer Review by LukeAllison (talk) 15:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
The draft is including a lot of new material different from what the article had already offered. It was a very interesting take including how Marie’s work taken for comedic purposes. Linking Moliere to its wikipage would be a great addition so the people following the article would get more from the addition. As well including a little bit about her sister and her role for women was a good addition. A few things that could be added when the draft talks about her role to teach other women maybe see if you can find people that she taught or helped. This would develop more in her work in assisting other women. Also the section of career in chemistry potentially add how she was able to self-teach herself chemistry. I think that would really add how significant it was for Marie to add to chemistry. For my article I’m going to investigate how Recklinghausen affected other people’s work like Marie. The article draft is pretty good, good job.

Peer Review Response
I was thinking about linking Moliere to its wikipage if there is one for it, since I believe it was a fairly popular comedy in its time. I know that would help the reader to understand that portion of the article better. I can also link her sister's wiki page since she was mentioned as well. I can definetly do my best to find the people she gave lessons to, I'll just need to find a few more sources for that first. I can also add about her self-teaching chemistry a little bit more in depth. There are a few sources that mention that so I can do my best to add more details into that. Thank you for the advice!

Those are some good ideas, thank you. I'll try to do some research on more aspects of her personal life and her education. Unfortunately a lot of sources about her talk primarily about her book, since it is the main primary source from her time. I did link to the page for Moliere. Ouchlula (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2019 (UTC)