Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Walker Cathcart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:17, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Charles Walker Cathcart[edit]

  • ... that, inspired by Charles Cathcart, an estimated one million sphagnum moss dressings were supplied each month to the British Army in WW1? Source: "Cathcart subsequently published an account in the British Medical Journal and asked the War Office for permission for its general use as a wound dressing." "It was estimated that by 1918 around one million moss dressings each month were being sent to the Western Front and more distant theatres of war." doi:10.3366/anh.2015.0274.
    • ALT1:... that an estimated one million sphagnum moss dressings each month were supplied to the British Army in WW1 as a result of the suggestion by Charles Cathcart? Source: "Cathcart subsequently published an account in the British Medical Journal and asked the War Office for permission for its general use as wound dressing." "It was estimated that by 1918 around one million moss dressings each month were being sent to the Western Front and more distant theatres of war." doi:10.3366/anh.2015.0274.

5x expanded by Iainmacintyre (talk). Self-nominated at 14:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewing...may take a day or 2. I like that they learned about the moss from the enemy. Maybe another hook possible. Calling @Philafrenzy: to help here. Otherwise ALT1 better. Well done on this find. Whispyhistory (talk) 13:34, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
P.S. Needs thorough copy-editing throughout before proceeding. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Whispyhistory:, @Philafrenzy: Many thanks for that and the 2 additional hooks which rightly give Balfour his share of the credit. I have done a copy edit, tidying up the English and adding more links.Papamac (talk) 10:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

General eligibility:

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: ALT3 most accurate. Thank you Whispyhistory (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

The content is sound but there are still many small formatting and other errors in the text. I see at least six (not 6) in the lead alone such as spelling and incorrect capitalisation etc. It needs a thorough check paying attention to detail please as such things tend to undermine the credibility of an article. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Iainmacintyre, please check capitals etc. If unsure, ask Philafrenzy who kindly has reviewed article too, my grammar is terrible. Whispyhistory (talk) 20:37, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Whispyhistory, Philafrenzy Many thanks for those edits. I've been through it a couple of times and made more edits. I do have difficulty in interpreting the advice on capitalisation in the Wikipedia MOS. In this case "Extra Surgeon" and "Consulting Surgeon" may be the culprits. When I decapitilised surgeon-in-ordinary the link put the capital back in, so I have left the others for uniformity. Any advice appreciated. Papamac (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, can you go through the rest of it? I still see spelling mistakes and extra spaces and lines. Put the ref immediately after the full stop. We don't generally capitalise the first letter of job titles. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks again. Done that. I'm making a style sheetbased on MOS for my future reference.Papamac (talk) 07:02, 11 May 2019 (UTC)