Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Ray Farquharson


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promoted MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ray Farquharson

 * Nominator(s): Nikkimaria (talk)

Though Ray Farquharson was likely better known for his contributions to medicine, he served with distinction in the two World Wars, and was granted the Order of the British Empire for his service. I believe it meets the A-Class criteria, and is one of the most comprehensive accounts of his life available online. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:04, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

 Comments Support -- Heh, I saw the article before the nom and as soon as I read he was Canadian I thought of you... ;-) Looks good, a few points... That's it for first part, I'll do a bit of copyediting in the rest and then report back... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:22, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason you haven't used an infobox? Can't think of a decent military bio here that doesn't have one and I think they do help as a snapshot of the subject's life and career.
 * Not particularly; I've never gotten into the habit of adding them on most of the articles I create, though I wouldn't object if someone else did. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He had at least one sister, Jessie, and at least two brothers, Charles (who also became a doctor) and Robert (managing editor for The Globe and Mail and a minister at the Canadian Embassy to the United States). -- Couple of things: 1) I'm assuming no source says exactly how many siblings he had but the "at least"s don't read too well. Think it'd be better as simply His brother Charles also became a doctor while another brother, Robert, became managing editor for The Globe and Mail and a minister at the Canadian Embassy to the United States. If Jessie did something interesting by all means include her too, my point is that this way you look less equivocal while not pretending you know all the family details, i.e. you've picked some notable points/people only. 2) What sort of minister? Of religion or government? Seriously, because I think one tends to associate political ministers with a country's home government, not its embassies.
 * Taken your suggestion on the first point. On the second, the source gives only "minister", although political is implied; it's not entirely clear what the actual role is. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Considering the declaration above that he "served with distinction in two World Wars", is there no more available anywhere on his time in the First?
 * Perhaps not as I've just noticed while spotchecking that the Hall of Fame source says his WWI career was "brief"... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "Brief" would be an understatement, in this case. I'd be happy to add more info if I had it, but I don't, and I'd be surprised if someone found more. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Does "acid" really need linking?
 * Helen, a hematologist should perhaps be Helen, who became a hematologist, so it doesn't read as though she was born that way...
 * Back again after a brief copyedit -- there may be other places to improve the prose but I'm sure Dank will stop by some time... ;-)
 * Structure, detail, referencing and images look okay.
 * Spotchecked all instances of citations #5, #8, #13. Interpretation/reporting of source info generally seems accurate and w/o close paraphrasing, however:
 * Re. #8, is "assistant to the professor" actually the same as "assistant professor"? I ask out of genuine curiosity/ignorance... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, a couple of other sources explicitly said "assistant professor", so I assumed ref 8 just had a more idiomatic way of phrasing things. I have heard that phrase used, although it is somewhat ambiguous. Thanks for the review and the copyedits! Nikkimaria (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * My last outstanding point re. an infobox has been actioned so happy to support. I wouldn't  have minded seeing the original lead image retained there in the infobox, even at the expense of a picture in the relevant part of the main body, but not that fussed. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * An interesting article. some thoughts below:
 * " a treatment for cord degeneration" - may be an unfair question, but what is cord degeneration?
 * " in which he was known as a "doctor's doctor"" - unclear if this is "within which" (i.e. the practice called him this) or whether he was externally, or professionally known as this.
 * "continuous exogenous hormone doses" - is there a link or footnote that could help explain this bit?
 * "laboratory studies in the evaluation of illness" - I wasn't sure what this meant; is this the same as doing laboratory tests to diagnose a patient's illness?
 * " Farquharson concluded that government support for research was inadequate because it failed to specifically address medical research as a separate discipline and because it was financially insufficient" - "both because" might work better, as otherwise the second explanation might seem self-evident.
 * Bibliography: I wasn't sure why there's only one book mentioned; there are quite a lot in the references. The references should be consistent: in one case you've got "Horlick, Louise (2007). J. Wendell Macleod. McGill-Queen's University Press. p. 29.", for example, and another is "Best 2003, p. 401."
 * A really minor MOS point, but the titles of the books etc. in the references/bibliography need capitals throughout for the longer words. Hchc2009 (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments! I think I've addressed most of them. I've still got some books in footnotes only, but those are largely "special" books (dictionaries, almanacs, etc). Let me know if anything needs to be clarified further. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comments This looks pretty good, but needs a bit more work to reach A class:
 * One of the people infoboxes would be helpful. I used Infobox person for John Treloar (museum administrator), who was also a person who had notable military service in both world wars but this wasn't his main claim to fame.
 * Can 'endocrinology' be linked or explained when it's first mentioned in the lead?
 * Did Farquharson serve overseas in World War I?
 * What was No. 1 Air Command, and where was it located? - from the text of the article it appears that this was a Canada-based unit - is this correct?
 * "Farquharson discovered what is now known as the "Farquharson Phenomenon": the introduction of continuous exogenous hormone doses suppresses the natural production of that hormone in the patient and causes temporary atrophy in the producing organ." - the second half of this sentence reads a bit oddly. I think it would benefit from a 'that' after the colon, or a re-arrangement to the same affect.
 * "he was known for advocating both this and understanding of potential psychological issues in his medical teaching." - the "understanding of potential psychological issues in his medical teaching" reads oddly. I think I know what you're getting at, but it's a bit unclear as worded.
 * "government support for research was inadequate both because it failed to specifically address medical research as a separate discipline and because it was financially insufficient." - this also doesn't read well. As written, it basically states that he found that government funding was inadequate because it was inadequate. I think that you could simplify this - how about "Farquharson concluded that the existing government support for research failed to specifically address medical research as a separate discipline [separate from what??] and was financially insufficient" or similar.
 * "Farquharson advocated for progressive medical education taught by practicing physicians[23] and for research as continuing education for doctors" - this is written in the passive voice and is unclear. How about "Farquharson advocated for practicing physicians to deliver progressive medical education as well as for doctors to undertake continuing education through conducting research" or similar?
 * When did he become Regent of the American College of Physicians?
 * "He was also appointed a Knight of the Military and Hospitaller Order of St Lazarus of Jerusalem and an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine in London." - needs a reference Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Nick, thanks for your comments! I think I've addressed most of them. I haven't used an infobox, and couldn't quickly locate the ref for the Order of St Lazarus so have removed that for now. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support My comments are now addressed. Great work with this article. Nick-D (talk) 07:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Support Comments: G'day this looks generally fine to me. There is not a lot for me to comment on, I have just a few minor points (feel free to disregard if you disagree): AustralianRupert (talk) 01:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I wonder if the portrait of the subject in his uniform might not be better in the Career section as currently that doesn't have any images to break it up? If it was moved, the top right could be taken up by an infobox, if there is an appropriate one (the Infobox person that Nick mentions would probably work). Its not a warstoper, though, if you aren't keen on it;
 * I'd just as soon keep the image up there; I haven't another to use in the infobox, and I quite like the effect. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * regarding the image of the subject "during the First World War", I wonder if the caption shouldn't be tweaked a little. As it is that he did not serve overseas, saying "during the First World War" will for most readers lead them to think that he fought in France or Belgium. So what I am suggesting is to tweak the caption to "Farquharson while training in Canada during the First World War" or something similar. Just a suggestion;
 * "before enlisting in the Canadian Field Artillery (67th Battery) in early 1918 as a gunner, though he did not serve overseas." Was his rank "gunner"? If so, it could probably be wikilinked to "Gunner (rank)";
 * "Recalled from the war to..." Does this mean that he was requested by someone? For me the term means that he came back upon request, but it is also possible that you mean that the war ended and so he returned to civilian life, in which case it might be tweaked to clarify this. How do the sources describe this?
 * They say "recalled" and don't elaborate - sources on his WWI service are quite sketchy. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * related to the above (and depending upon the cause and effect issue that this suggestion creates), "before enlisting in the Canadian Field Artillery (67th Battery) in early 1918 as a gunner, though he did not serve overseas. Recalled from the war to..." Perhaps this might sound smoother: "before enlisting in the Canadian Field Artillery (67th Battery) in early 1918 as a gunner. He did not serve overseas, though, as he was recalled from the war to..."? Or, depending on whether there was a cause and effect, perhaps this: "....He did not serve overseas, though, and he was later recalled from the war to..."?
 * "gaining a reputation as a "doctor's doctor"". Is it possible to elaborate on what this means? Sorry if I've missed something;
 * "Farquharson enlisted in the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF)..." A very minor point regarding terminology, as an officer, one is usually "appointed" rather than "enlisted". That is, at least the terminology used here in Australia. Not sure about Canada, but something to consider maybe. What word does you source use?
 * "enlist" is in the source; I got the impression that he was not initially an officer, but I could be quite wrong on that. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * in the Bibliography, are there ISBNs or OCLCs for the Creighton and Horlick sources?
 * in the Bibliography, I think the titles should be tweaked for capitalisation. For instance, this: "The forked road: Canada, 1939–1957", should probably be: "The Forked Road: Canada, 1939–1957". AustralianRupert (talk) 01:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Except where noted these have been addressed. Thanks for reviewing! Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * Per above, I think it really would benefit from an infobox to make things much easier to read at a glance.
 * "In 1934 he became the head of the therapeutics department at Toronto, and in 1947 was appointed to the Sir John and Lady Eaton Professor of Medicine chair.[13] He continued to publish research findings on various topics, including anorexia nervosa.[14] Farquharson was a charter member of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, which oversaw all Canadian postgraduate medical education; he served on its council from 1939 to 1943, and was the council's president from 1945 to 1947." - I would suggest moving these things into a chronological format like the rest of the text it's disjointing to see things go from here to "On 25 August 1943..."
 * The section covering his activities in World War II are very slight compared with the rest of the text.
 * I'd be happy to support if these are addressed. — Ed! (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing, first two addressed. I'm on holiday and away from some of my sources at the moment, so can't look into the last until January. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's fine. If the coords are willing to keep the review open the extra week I'm happy to support once it's been expanded. — Ed! (talk) 17:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've added a bit, though not much more was available. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Support Everything is now in order to me. Excellent work. — Ed! (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.