User:Sjhxbn/sandbox

Papyri History (for Egyptian Medical Papyri)
These ancient Egyptian texts were written long before their discovery and publication, and many are now owned either privately or preserved at universities all over the world. The first papyri to be discovered would be the Berlin Papyrus, discovered and subsequently published by Heinrich Brugsch in 1863. Heinrich was the first to study this papyrus, and a translation did not become available until 1909, published by Walter Wreszinski. In 1875, the Ebers Papyrus, covering a broad concept of general pathology was published. Some 20 years later, the Kahun papyrus was published by F.L. Griffith in 1898, and this was the first published papyri about the practice of gynecology. In 1905 the Hearst papyrus was published by G.A. Reisner. Subsequently, the publication of these papyri inspired Walter Wreszinski to attempt a production of overviews of medicine in ancient Egypt. He first published his first of three parts in 1909, Die Medizin der Alten Aegypter , and the following two publications in 1912 and 1913. These were primarily translations with some commentary overviewing the Egyptian medical processes. Sjhxbn (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't until 1932 that when Warren R Dawson first published an analytical breakdown of medical texts and confusing words and phrases therein. Dawson first starts to challenge the previous findings of Reisner and comes to some many conclusions about the meanings of multiple words, and discovers that some of the meanings had been wrong, and corrects them.

The Ramesseum papyrus was discovered in the year 1898 at the bottom of a tomb-shaft, and was then left untouched until a few years later. In 1900, Percy Newberry started the process of unrolling and preserving the Ramesseum papyri so that it can be further studied and stored without threat of further wear and tear.

Sources: Sjhxbn (talk) 15:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Van der Eijk, Philip, editor. “EGYPTIAN MEDICINE AND GREEK MEDICINE.” Greek Medicine from Hippocrates to Galen: Selected Papers, by Jacques Jouanna and Neil Allies, Brill, LEIDEN; BOSTON, 2012, pp. 3–20. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctt1w76vxr.6. Accessed 8 Mar. 2021.

Dawson, Warren R. “Studies in the Egyptian Medical Texts.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol. 18, no. 3/4, 1932, pp. 150–154. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3854976. Accessed 8 Mar. 2021.

Peer Review by Krjwvq (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
The article does a good job of presenting the history and discovery of Egyptian Papyri well and in a neutral voice. The lead also is applicable to the content of the article section. The article section also does not try to draw a conclusion. The sources are all listed in the sandbox reference section. I do not know enough about egyptian papyri history to know what else to improve the article. One thing might possibly be to add more on the studying done on it before it was translated. What do the universities that own some of the papyri do with them? Krjwvq (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Peer Review by MikeR97 (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
I like that you added the table of translated words. As a reader it allows me to feel more of a connection with the payri. However, I am wondering if you plan to add to the table? With four translations it I feel like it may be better as a stand alone paragraph.

Your additions all seem to be normal. Good job not showing any bias between the different ownerships(private or public) of the papyri.

All of your citation links worked. Except for the one link to another wikipedia source all of the other links are the same source, more sources would add more credibility. Finding a newer source would also bring more credibility to the article. Also the table of translations needs to be cited as well.

I think you have a very good start to your article. As you move forward with it I would suggest that you pull information from multiple newer sources. Good Luck! MikeR97 ( talk ) 16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Peer Review Responses
(Krjwvq) We do plan on adding more about the work done with the papyri before it was translated, we're just working on a few things at a time. The universities that own the papyri don't really seem to do a lot with them on their own, but outside researchers do tend to use them in their own work, and I plan to add that information where relevant.

(MikeR97) The table is still undecided on whether or not it will make it into the final draft, it may become a paragraph type thing, but there are also a lot more words that I can populate the table with, i'm just having trouble getting the characters to display properly. There are a lot of links to a single source, but I do have more sources through ILL and other methods, I just have yet to add their information into the sandbox. I am going to take your suggestions as I planned on similar things moving forward, so they are actually great suggestions. Sjhxbn (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Egyptian Medical Papyri
This is where we are currently working on the article. Sjhxbn (talk) 16:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I am thinking about adding a terminology section / table that details what some words and phrases mean when translated into English, and below is a history section I am creating. Sjhxbn (talk) 23:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Sjhxbn (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Evaluating an Article
Article Link: Oxford Calculators


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * There isn't a ton of information in the article, and it all seems relevant to me and not distracting.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are not any biased claims or statements made in this article to my knowledge and ability to detect.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The article could use some more information on some of the Oxford Calculator members, some only have a couple sentences.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * A couple of the citations are no longer functioning, mainly number 5.
 * 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?
 * A quite large amount of claims on this article are actually completely missing references or citations of any kind. The few that are there however, seem to be neutral, but again there aren't many.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Nothing is out of date other than maybe a citation that could be touched up to have a functioning link due to a URL change.
 * 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?
 * Most of the talk page is some people asking for references and more information on some of the subjects in the page. There are some very old comments from peer reviews, presumably for a class.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a Start-Class, Low-Importance, and Mid-Importance on Some projects. It is part of six projects ranging from Science and Academia, to University of Oxford.

Egyptian medical papyri
Egyptian medical papyri

We are thinking of adding a history section to begin with, as it doesn't really have one. Mainly on stuff like who came up with it and such

Sources:

Dawson, Warren R. “Studies in the Egyptian Medical Texts.” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol. 18, no. 3/4, 1932, pp. 150–154. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3854976. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.

Finlayson, James. “Ancient Egyptian Medicine.” The British Medical Journal, vol. 1, no. 1684, 1893, pp. 748–752. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/20224088. Accessed 26 Feb. 2021.