Talk:F. William Sunderman
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Kavyansh.Singh in topic Did you know nomination
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from F. William Sunderman appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 November 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Did you know nomination edit
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 20:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that physician and scientist F. William Sunderman continued working until shortly before his death at the age of 104? Source: "Frederick William Sunderman, a portent of the future, died on March 9th, aged 104". The Economist. 22 March 2003. (available on the Wikipedia Library): "In 1971 he founded a journal called Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science, which he was helping to edit up to a few weeks before his death."/"In Memoriam: Frederick William Sunderman, M.D., Ph.D. (1898–2003)" :"Until shortly before his death, he went to his office at the Pennsylvania Hospital every weekday, put on his white coat, and began his daily tasks, answering correspondence, managing investments, advising medical organizations, sponsoring chamber music concerts, attending grand rounds, and enjoying spirited luncheon conversations with old friends."
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Skyrush
- Comment:
Moved to mainspace by Spicy (talk). Self-nominated at 20:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC).
Hi Spicy, review follows: article moved to mainspace on 24 October and exceeds minimum length; article is well written and cited inline throughout to reliable sources; I didn't pick up on any overly close paraphrasing in a random check on the sources; hook is interesting, mentioned in the article and checks out to one of the sources cited (don't have access to the oother, but it is quoted above); a QPQ has been carried out. Looks fine to me - Dumelow (talk) 15:08, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
