 | A fact from Benjamin Philip Watson appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 January 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
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 Yoninah (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the New York gynaecologist Benjamin Philip Watson was examined in surgery by Joseph Bell, the model for Sherlock Holmes? Source: "One of his examiners was Joseph Bell, the Edinburgh surgeon whom Arthur Conan Doyle (who had been Bell's assistant), used as the model for Sherlock Holmes." Berkow
- ALT1:... that the New York gynaecologist Benjamin Philip Watson was head of academic departments in three different countries. ? Source: "...obstetrician and gynaecologist who was the head of academic departments in three different countries." Gane
- ALT2:... that the New York gynaecologist Benjamin Philip Watson was quizzed in a surgical examination by Joseph Bell, the model for Sherlock Holmes? Source: "One of his examiners was Joseph Bell, the Edinburgh surgeon whom Arthur Conan Doyle (who had been Bell's assistant), used as the model for Sherlock Holmes." Berkow
Moved to mainspace by Iainmacintyre (talk). Self-nominated at 11:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC).
- Comment: "...examined in surgery..." could be mistakenly understood as Bell having operated on Watson, or observed surgery on Watson. David notMD (talk) 16:57, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks @David notMD:, that's true but the hook is correct as it stands and as written sounds more enigmatic and hooky. However I've added ALT2 which addresses your comment. Papamac (talk) 15:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Comment ALT2 or the original preferred to ALT1. Text of article makes clear what "examined in surgery" means. I am doing another DYK review as my QPQ, but if I finish that one and yours still unclaimed by a reviewer I will return. David notMD (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- ? - Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
Hook eligibility:
- Cited: - ?
- Interesting:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Article was moved to mainspace on December 5 and nominated within seven days. Length is adequate and the article is neutral in tone. Article meets almost all sourcing requirements. Page numbers are needed for the two PDF files used to verify the information. No plagiarism issues detected. Image used for Watson is appropriately licensed as fair use. QPQ requirement was completed by what appears to be a previous alias for this nominator. Each of the three hooks are reasonably interesting. ALT0 and ALT2 are verified with the cited source. ALT1 requires a page number as noted aboved. Overall, the article is well written and only one minor concern was noted. Flibirigit (talk) 04:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks @Flibirigit: I have added page numbers to the Gane citation and they are already there for the Berkow citation. Papamac (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- The Edward Stewart Taylor (1985; "HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN GYNECOLOGICAL SOCIETY 1876-1981") PDF needs page numbers. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Flibirigit: OK. Citation is list of officer bearers in Appendix II which doesn't have a page number, so I've used the 'at' field to include that information. Papamac (talk) 16:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Article now meets all requirements for sourcing, and the nomination meets all DYK requirements. All three hooks approved as properly cited, mentioned inline and reasonably interesting. Flibirigit (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
