Talk:Jean Desbouvrie

Magasin Pittoresque

Perhaps you've found this already, but there is an article about Desbouvrie in Le Magasin pittoresque, vol. 57, Paris 1889. See http://visualiseur.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb32810629m/date1889. (You may have to enter the page number, 328.)

It seems to have the same content as the Zoologist report, judging from the article, but it has some correction. Jean had been raising swallows for "almost 40 years", so he's likely to have been born slightly earlier than 1840; the distance between Paris and Roubaix is given as "more than 150 km", and his swallows covered that in 75 minutes. (On a map, the distance is ~180 km.)

Also, there's a low quality picture of Jean's house with the balcony where he trained his birds. Perhaps this can be used in the section "Swallow training". -- Eugène van der Pijll (talk) 00:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The same article is at http://www.arisitum.org/faune/35.htm, with a better picture. -- Eugène van der Pijll (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Um ... what became of his efforts?

There's a good lead-up and description of the conception, but not of how they ended. Ray^Talk 19:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

His proposals stopped getting attention. The only followup source indicated he was unwilling to do followup testing on his sparrows. The proposed hangover remedy didn't receive any attention in later sources. It'd be original research to say that it went nowhere, but it obviously did go nowhere. Durova^Charge! 23:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I propose to include info based on the following - any ideas/suggstions?? [ jw ]

1. Annales médico-psychologiques 1891 (reporting la séance du 19 Juin 1888) http://www.bium.univ-paris5.fr/histmed/medica/page?90152x1891x14&p=445 and http://web2.bium.univ-paris5.fr/livanc/?cote=90152x1891x14&p=446&do=page contain a report of Desbouvrie's suggestions to l'Académie de Médicine and the lukewarm response he obtained. [ jw ]

2. Le Presse 5-jan-1891 http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5461592.texte.f1.langFR contains (OCR-scanned, -garbled) information about le drame de Roubaix = Desbourvrie's arrest after over-indulging in alcohol and seriously injuring his wife. This may be one of the reasons why his suggestions were not followed up or taken seriously by l'Académie. [ jw ] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikramaratna (talk • contribs) 10:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

3. the Wanganui Herald, NZ, 1890 also reported the demonstration http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=WH18901025.2.29 presumably the report of a report (although they say it comes from their correspondent in Dunkirk) [jw]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jean Desbouvrie/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I will do the GA Review on this article. H1nkles (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Looking forward to it. Durova^Charge! 18:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Review Philosophy

When I do an article review I like to provide a Heading-by-Heading breakdown of suggestions for how to make the article better. It is done in good faith as a means to improve the article. It does not necessarily mean that the article is not GA quality, or that the issues listed are keeping it from GA approval. I also undertake minor grammatical and prose edits. After I finish this part of the review I will look at the over arching quality of the article in light of the GA criteria and make my determination as to the overall quality of the article.

GA Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   There are some missing non-breaking spaces and hard dashes that should be addressed.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   The credible sources don't cover some of the major aspects unfortunately. If further information becomes available it should be included.

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   The author is an image expert I have no concern about the images

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   I note that one of the images was removed, this is unfortunate. The other image is fine.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   The article is good despite a lack of information. As much as is readily available without engaging in WP:OR is in the article. I will pass it to GA.

Lead

• The lead is fairly undeveloped. Per WP:LEAD it should be a summary of the entire article, the lead does not mention his youth or the actually training of the swallows. This should be added to augment the lead.
• I added a hard dash (–) to the dates in the lead. Check other places where hard dashes would be required per WP:DASH.

Youth

You mention robbing nests between his work deliveries, what was his work deliveries? What did he do during his youth? Is there mention in the sources about how he trained these swallows?

All the information that was available from reliable sources has been included. Durova^Charge! 23:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Swallow training

• You appear to use Sparrows and Swallows interchangeably, is this intentional? You may have ornithologists who take issue with that :).
• I added a non-breaking space between 30 and years. Please check throughout per WP:NBSP.

Government interest

• In the government interest section there is a distance mentioned of 258 km, per WP:UNIT there should also be a conversion to miles in (parentheses). H1nkles (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

the 258 km would make up 160,31 mi . . . with the given 90 minutes of time, this would calculate to a speed of 172 km/h - the article on swallows assign them a speed of 20 m/s or 72 km/h. There seem to be a little inconsistancy.--Pentaclebreaker (talk) 10:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

References

The refs look good, links are good and formatting is ok.

Overall Review

The article is coming along. Images are great, prose is fine. There are some MOS compliance issues that I'd like to see addressed. These are mentioned above. I note that a question about the results of his hangover experiments is listed in the article's talk page. There is no information as to the outcome of these experiments? We don't want OR so it's fine if nothing exists, but that is a glaring question readers are left with at the end of the article. What about his personal life? What about his death? Anything about these topics? Also the aforementioned job he did as a youth that would entail "deliveries". I'd like to see a little more if it's available in order to satisfy the comprehensive criteria. I'll hold the article for a week pending work. H1nkles (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Basically this was a fellow who was notable for two things a few years apart, and was pretty effective at getting attention for his projects. Then the reliable sources stopped writing about him. So we have only sketchy details of his early life and none of his final years. The few other sources in French and German are basically translations and derivatives of the sources already cited in this article.

It would be OR to say this explicitly within the article, but the fellow was a crank. The topic turned up during a survey of nineteenth century aviation, which was mostly ballooning. An architectural design for an aviary of military swallows? Research on aviaries, military communications, etc. turned up nothing. But mentions of a 'Jean Desbouvrie' occurred. Looking further, there was enough material to establish notability and go well beyond a stub. And as it became apparent exactly what he had done, it was hilarious. Would like to make this a candidate for the April Fool's main page: the fellow convinced the government of France to invest in military research on swallows, and convinced the leading French medical society to publish a proposed solution to the evils of alcoholism--in the form of a supposed hangover cure he had tested very thoroughly upon himself.

Good comments above; will review and polish. And will pick through the sources to see how much more rounded this can become. Durova^Charge! 00:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good, I certainly prioritize maintaining an accurate article consistent with the research record. I did find it interesting that he tried to convince the world about the evils of alcoholism by finding a cure for hangovers. Wouldn't that attain the opposite result? Please take a look at the MOS suggestions I made. I will pass the article to GA. H1nkles (talk) 15:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. What really had me doubled over was the bland assurance that he had tested the hangover cure extensively upon himself. Have rewritten and expanded the lead. Could expand the details of the hangover cure by translating a bit from the report. Durova^Charge! 17:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Lead?

The lead does not adequately summarize the article and the first sentence should establish notability. It's very unclear and vague (Was he French? What was his profession? Is this all that is talked about in the article? What does "this work" refer to specifically?) The lead should be rewritten. Hekerui (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote the first sentence in the lead to help satisfy the GA Criteria. I will reevalute the quality of the lead but I will defer to Durova who is the GA nominator and primary editor on this article. H1nkles (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Backyard Competition ?? ... pardon ?!

1. What on earth is an International Backyard Competition ? cf. [[1]] I am convinced that this is a mistranslation (or even a mistranslation of a mistranslation) but I am perplexed as to the original French

• Can somebody help please ?
  I have also put this request on the French discussion page [[2]]

If there's no quick answer I propose to remove the word backyard
viz Honorary diploma of the Roubaix International Backyard Competition of 1889

The French version of this page states Diplôme d'honneur pour son travail sur les Hirondelles.

2. There is a second issue here -
I have not so far been able to find a reference to any Roubaix International Competition or Expo in 1889. jw (talk) 16:03, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

is : Barnyard.

There was an international barnyard competition from Roubaix and desbouvrie received two awards for his work on the swallows

--JuliusMassius (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

• • what was the title in French of the barnyard competition ? I still fear a mistranslation and would liketo get this straight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwikip (talk • contribs) 07:30, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

• French : Concours International de Basse-cour de Roubaix,
• English : International Barnyard contest of Roubaix

--JuliusMassius (talk) 11:13, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuliusMassius

• • j'ai rectifié la référence au Concours International d'Animaux de Basse-cour de Roubaix qui est cité dans le journal du 23-10-1889 donc International Barnyard Animal Contest...
    ainsi que des temps de verbe qui doivent être au passé (past simple) en anglais jw (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
  • par ailleurs je n'ai pas trouvé de référence à à une médaille du travail, simplement une médaille jw (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

la médaille du travail c'est : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9daille_d%27honneur_du_travail

On lui offre cette médaille pendant le Concours International de Basse-cour de Roubaix mais c'est l'état qui le donne attribue.

--JuliusMassius (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuliusMassius - je sais ce qu'est une médaille du travail.

• • • ci-dessus, j'aurai du dire que je n'ai pas trouvé de référence à une médaille du travail attribuée à Jean Desbouvrie, simplement une référence à une médaille. jw (talk) 16:53, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Sur cet article c'est écrit : https://www.bn-r.fr/notice_alto.php?q=id:115815

Débouvrie a obtenu une médaille de vermeille et un diplôme d'honneur Ce n'est pas une médaille du travail, c'est une erreur de ma part. --JuliusMassius (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@JuliusMassius

• • • • nous sommes d'accord ! we agree. this issue is therefore closed jw (talk) 17:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Which swallow species ?

The French page mentions ' hirondelle ' and ' hirondelle sauvage ', while displaying the image of a hirondelle de fenêtre.
Do we actually know exactly which species of swallow was used by Desbouvrie ?

I ask this because if they were hirondelle de cheminée this would translate as Swallow Hirundo rustica Linnaeus, 1758 - but if hirondelle de fenêtre then it would be House Martin Delichon urbicum (Linnaeus, 1758).
Both species would probably have been common in late-19th-century Roubaix.
jw (talk) 09:28, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the original references and text in French, it would seem from their descriptions that Desbouvrie's 'swallows' were indeed House-Martins.
I propose to put a note in the top of the page, clarifying this misnomer ... but I shall leave the word 'swallow' throughout the page, as 'swallow' is the word used by documentation and references in English.
-- jw (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, it would be Southern rough-winged swallow.

https://books.google.fr/books?id=-SGCND13WeYC&pg=PA215&dq=%27Esplanade+des+Invalides+desbouvrie&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiIs-W7_6zuAhWSzYUKHY7YDvAQ6AEwBHoECAEQAg#v=onepage&q='Esplanade%20des%20Invalides%20desbouvrie&f=false JuliusMassius (talk) 09:44, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

hello @JuliusMassius, I disagree, I don't think it could be a southern rough-winged swallow ! Desbouvrie's and other documents state the swallows were nesting in (on) the house, in France. <br In France there are no wild southern rough-winged swallows - nor for that matter white-banded swallows (Atticora fasciata) which were named in the footnote of your reference document as being shy of humans ! Both species are apparently forest-dwellers.
We should carefully re-read the original documents jw (talk) 15:56, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Signature de Jean Baptiste Desbouvrie, l'hirondelliste militaire.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)