User:Martinmart10/sandbox

Add to an Article: Oxford Calculators
John Dumbleton became a member of the calculators in 1338–39. After becoming a member, he left the calculators for a brief period of time to study theology in Paris in 1345–47. After his study there he returned to his work with the calculators in 1347–48. One of his main pieces of work, Summa logicae et philosophiae naturalis, focused on explaining the natural world in a coherent and realistic manner, unlike some of his colleagues, claiming that they were making light of serious endeavors. Dumbleton attempted many solutions to the latitude of things, most were refuted by Richard Swineshead in his Liber Calculationum.

Article Evaluation for Oxford Calculators

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * I am not sure John Dumbleton is relevant information deserving of a paragraph.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article states that they shouldn't be considered modern scientist yet they had their work stolen by Galileo who was a modern scientist.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Most citations don't have internet links but the ones that are on the internet support the claim.
 * 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?
 * The first paragraph on Thomas Bradwardine is missing a reference to his published works.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The information is referenced from post 2000's sources so it is modern.
 * 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 is a comment about the relevancy of John Dumbleton.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated start class for a multitude of WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't mentioned them in class

Peer Review: Oxford Calculators
I think that there are some really good additions and changes to the article here. The revisions that I see improve the structure of the sentences a lot, and the edit for mean speed theorem is interesting because I don’t believe the original version and the edited version are the same. So I just wanted to see if that is an actual correction of the concept, rather than just trying to clarify! As for additions, I think those are pretty good as well! It seems like there’s a lot to say about latitudes, and the notes that I see clarify on that concept a lot. The addition for John Dumbleton, that he became a member in 1338-1339, is a little vague. Does that mean he took two years to become a member? That’s kind of odd… I’m also not sure if the quote about Galen from the “Medieval Concepts” source is going to stay in that phrasing, but it feels awkward in there as is. I am also left curious about what information is going to be put in the new philosophy section, as that wasn’t specified. I’m also left wondering, is there information about any other calculators that may have been prominent? May be worth digging into! Also, I’m sure it will happen in time, but I would have liked to see where sources are cited, and how they were used. But overall, some very good revisions and additions! --Cmatvc (talk) 17:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Response to Peer Review
Sentence structure is something that we are looking to improve and make our additions “flow” better in the article. The original mean speed theorem in the article had an error that changed its meaning away from the actual mean speed theorem in kinetics. Latitudes and the Theory of Forms is quite a big subject of the Oxford Calculators and we are carefully trying to add a section on it that is clear and concise, while also remaining true. Regarding John Dumbleton, there does seem to be a difference between sources on when he gained membership to the Oxford Calculators and in general what he was doing and where he was in the late 1330’s to early 1340’s. The reason we have included the Galen quote is that it is a clear concise description of the Latitudes of Forms with a real world application. Regarding the other Oxford Calculators, we are trying to add substantial information about the Calculators as a whole to this article and feel that more specific information on each Calculator themselves should go in their own Wikipedia articles. Martinmart10 (talk) 16:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

For clarification, the mean speed theorem in the article is incorrect. The article mentions that a body moving a constant velocity will travel the same distance as an object under constant acceleration in the same time as long as the constant velocity is HALF of the FINAL velocity. This is only true if the object starts from rest, but for all other cases where the object starts at an initial velocity this is untrue. The replacement is a just a better worded mathematical correction. Latitudes are not gone into at all and after reading into the Oxford Calculators we've realized that they were actually very important to them. We shall continue to expand upon them and make sure the reader has at least a rough idea of what these latitudes are. As for the John Dumbleton part, the text we found said that he became a member in 1338-1339, but we can look into that again to see if we can clarify if it was a two year process or not. The quote about Galen is a direct quote from an article, but we can try and ease into it better to make it not as awkward. On the subject of the new philosophy section, we are currently trying to collect more information that will go in that section so we just hadn't marked certain things down for that yet. That section is where we will talk about the latitude of forms as well as other philosophical approaches the calculators took. When it comes to the information about other calculators, it is difficult to add a lot of information about them because they have their own Wikipedia articles and it wouldn't be right to add words from their articles to ours whenever we should be talking about the calculators as a whole, and not specific individuals as much. We will also add where we cited our sources and how they were used. Thank you for your review it helped clarify some things and we appreciate the help!. Dplf2b (talk) 16:46, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Article Sources: Oxford Calculators

 * Sylla, Edith Dudley. “The Oxford Calculators' Middle Degree Theorem in Context.” Early Science and Medicine, vol. 15, no. 4/5, 2010, pp. 338–370. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20787421. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.
 * Sylla, Edith D. “MEDIEVAL CONCEPTS OF THE LATITUDE OF FORMS: THE OXFORD CALCULATORS.” Archives D'histoire Doctrinale Et Littéraire Du Moyen Âge, vol. 40, 1973, pp. 223–283. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/44403231. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.
 * Podkoński, Robert. “RICHARD SWINESHEAD'S ‘DE LUMINOSIS’: NATURAL PHILOSOPHY FROM AN OXFORD CALCULATOR.” Recherches De Théologie Et Philosophie Médiévales, vol. 82, no. 2, 2015, pp. 363–403. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/26486060. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.
 * Weisheipl, James A. “The Place of John Dumbleton in the Merton School.” Isis, vol. 50, no. 4, 1959, pp. 439–454. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/226428. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.
 * SPADE, PAUL VINCENT. “William Heytesbury's ‘Position on ‘Insolubles’ : One Possible Source.’” Vivarium, vol. 14, no. 2, 1976, pp. 114–120. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/42569691. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.

Draft Additions: Oxford Calculators

 * They used Aristotelian logic and physics. They also studied and attempted to quantify every physical and observable characteristic, like heat, force, color, density, and light.
 * Replacement > Using Aristotelian logic and physics, they studied and attempted to quantify every physical and observable characteristic: heat, force, color, density, and light. Dplf2b (talk) 22:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * They first formulated the mean speed theorem: a body moving with constant velocity travels the same distance as an accelerated body in the same time if its velocity is half the final speed of the accelerated body.
 * Replacement > They first formulated the mean speed theorem: a body moving with constant speed will travel the same distance as an accelerated body in the same period of time as long as the body with constant speed travels at half of the sum of initial and final velocities for the accelerated body. Dplf2b (talk) 22:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * These men built on the slightly earlier work of Walter Burley and Gerard of Brussels.
 * Replacement > Using the slightly earlier works of Walter Burley, Gerard of Brussels, and Nicole Oresme, these individuals expanded upon the concepts of 'latitudes' and what real world applications they could apply them to.Dplf2b (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * New Section: Philosophy
 * Latitude of Forms:
 * The Latitude of Forms is a topic that many of the Oxford Calculators published volumes on. Developed by Nicole Orseme, a “Latitude '' is an abstract concept of a range that forms may vary inside of. Before latitudes were introduced into mechanics, they were used in both medical and philosophical fields. Medical authors Galen and Avicenna can be given credit for the origin of the concept. “Galen says, for instance, that there is a latitude of health which is divided into three parts, each in turn having some latitude. First, there is the latitude of healthy bodies, second the latitude of neither health nor sickness, and third the latitude of sickness.” - (MEDIEVAL CONCEPTS OF THE LATITUDE OF FORMS: THE OXFORD CALCULATORS Page 226)  The calculators attempted to measure and explain these changes in latitude concretely and mathematically.  John Dumbleton discusses latitudes in Part II and Part III of his work the Summa. He is critical of earlier philosophers in Part II as he believes latitudes are measurable and quantifiable and later in Part III of the Summa attempts to use latitudes to measure local motion. Roger Swineshead defines five latitudes for local motion being:  First, the latitude of local motion, Second, the latitude of velocity of local motion, Third, the latitude of slowness of the local motion, Fourth, the latitude of the acquisition of the latitude of local motion, and the Fifth being, the latitude of the loss of the latitude of local motion. Each of these latitudes are infinite and are comparable to the velocity, acceleration, and deceleration of the local motion of an object. Martinmart10 (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC) Dplf2b (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thomas Bradwardine change/addition
 * Bradwardine furthered the study of using mathematics to explain physical reality. Drawing on the work of Robert Grosseteste, Robert Kilwardby and Roger Bacon. His work was in direct opposition to William of Ockham. Martinmart10 (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Notes
 * Latitude of Forms
 * Swineshead measured qualities by latitudes and degrees
 * Swineshead and Bradwardine had different philosophies on latitudes
 * Dumbelton was in agreement with Swineshead
 * “Latitudes” are a range in which a given form can vary
 * E.G. quality, quantity, complexity
 * A “latitude” is abstract and may not actually exist
 * The Oxford calculators did not agree on these ranges sometimes
 * Calculators inspired by Orseme and Thomas Aquanis
 * Calculators subscribed to the “Addition of Forms” theory
 * Addition of forms example: a drop of water added to a lake is just the lake plus a drop of water. Not a new lake.
 * Swineshead philosophically found the relationship between position, velocity, and acceleration through the latitude of forms and degrees of change Martinmart10 (talk) 22:11, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Reference Additions

 * Sylla, Edith D. (1973) "MEDIEVAL CONCEPTS OF THE LATITUDE OF FORMS: THE OXFORD CALCULATORS"