Schwester Selma has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 10, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from Schwester Selma appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 July 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Schwester Selma appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 December 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Name edit
I assume she had a last name. Shouldn't the article be under her full name, with a redirect from "Schwester Selma" if that is how she was known? --Jms2000 20:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- She was known as "Schwester Selma", so I left the title that way per WP:COMMONNAME: Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. I put her birth name in the lead and infobox per WP:MOS. Yoninah (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Schwester Selma/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 12:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- I propose to take on this review. The article appears to be both well-written and interesting and I will study it in detail shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
First reading edit
- The lead should be a summary of the main body of text and should not need to include references because the information should be referenced at its main appearance.
- Following on from this, Selma's date of birth should be mentioned (and cited) in the "Early life and education" section.
- "Dr. Moshe Wallach, a German-Jewish doctor, came to Palestine in 1890 ..." - "came" is not really a suitable word as its use is normally limited to somewhere that is already being discussed, such as "Hamburg" in this instance.
- "Several weeks later, Jerusalem was hit with a year-long ..." - "by" rather than "with".
- "... paraffin lamps were kindled in the operating room." - "kindled" does not sound right here, perhaps "provided light" would be better.
- "She received her first assistant after ten years at the hospital." - What does this mean? She had other nurses working under her before this didn't she?
- "In the wards, she cultivated a spirit of warm, personalized patient care that became the modus operandi for the hospital to this day." - This sentence has mixed tenses. You could substitute (or add) "and this is still the case" for "to this day".
- "The November 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine ..." - I am ignorant of the history of Israel; in this paragraph who is besieging what? Was she trying to return to her post at the hospital?
- "reminding her students "that there is nothing humiliating in our work"." - It would be better to put the "that" before the quotation marks.
- The paragraphs in the final two sections are rather brief, and could perhaps be amalgamated. For example, "Awards and accolades" has 4 sentences and 3 paragraphs.
- Looking back again at the lead, I see a reference to her being called the "Jewish Florence Nightingale" but that fact is not mentioned in the body of the text.
- That's all for the moment. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
GA criteria edit
- The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout. I am happy with the alterations that have been made.
- The article uses several reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research.
- The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed.
- The article is neutral.
- The article is stable.
- The images are relevant and have suitable captions, and are all in the public domain.
- Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)