Jump to content

Talk:Jean Walton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Sdkb (talk). Self-nominated at 08:40, 2 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • . The source for the hook is not strong but it is repeated in her obit. QPQ done. The article is well written and it includes lots of refs. There is a free to use pic but its not very hooky. Article is neutral. Its new enough and this is good to go. Me and earwig can see no close paraphrasing. (I would suggest that you consider including this picture and the supporting story as I think this is of interest and also including the football story in the college article. but this is not part of the review).The hook is a bit verbose and I have shortened it but do feel free to revert. Well done. Victuallers (talk) 11:48, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the review! The shortened hook is fine; it'd be nice if there was a way to concisely communicate that the weighing was a recurring event rather than a one-time thing, but not sure how. And image added. (I considered adding the football story to Pomona's main article, but the 60s paragraph in the history section is already quite full and the other stuff is more important, so I think it's better placed in the traditions article and Walton's article.) {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To T:DYK/P7

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Jean Walton/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 06:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I will begin my review soon. — The Most Comfortable Chair 06:35, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Most Comfortable Chair, sounds good! Thanks for picking this up, and looking forward to your comments! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:37, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
  • Do we know what "B." stands for?
    I unfortunately couldn't find that anywhere. I know some academics without a middle name invent one so as to more easily differentiate themselves, so perhaps this is an example of that. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was an American academic administrator and women's studies scholar." — Could "mathematician" be added, since it constitutes a significant part of her life?
    I initially did that, but Murray (p. 198) talks about the publication of her doctoral dissertation as "perhaps, both her first and last act as a professional mathematician", so my sense is that, despite it being her education, it just wasn't her calling and isn't why she's notable, so it doesn't belong in the first sentence. I was able to cover the mathematics part of her life more thoroughly because of the details in Murray, but her role in Murray ultimately is that of someone who left the field. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She spent the bulk of her career at Pomona College in Claremont, California." — This could be removed as it summarizes what is already written in summary style in the second paragraph of the lead.
    The approach I took with the lead was to give a very broad definition of who she was in the first paragraph, per MOS:OPEN, and to then circle back and give the summary of her life in the longer second paragraph. For that same reason, I'm going to restore the growing up sentence to the second paragraph to fit with that framework. Does that work alright? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

[edit]
  • "Walton was born in 1914 in Middletown Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, the fourth of five daughters." — It should mention the date, which also avoids the awkward repetition of "in". Perhaps — "Jean B. Walton was born on March 6, 1914, the fourth of five daughters, in Middletown Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania."
    Done; good suggestion! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Her mother was a homemaker." — Do we know her name? If so, that could be mentioned.
    Frustratingly, we don't, at least from any of the available sources. The Pomona Progress-Bulletin managed to write a whole article about her parents visiting but used the sexist "George Walton and Mrs. Walton" framework, and Murray (p. 58) talks only about George and "his wife". {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she taught high school in New Jersey for three years." — Preferably it should be — "she taught (subject) at high school in New Jersey for three years." — Also, will there be a name of that high school?
    She taught math, so I'll add that, but I wasn't able to find the name of the school(s). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She then earned a master's degree from Brown University master's degree" — Master's in?
    Again math. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she did not fit his idea of a typical mathematician." — Nothing wrong here, but is it possible to expand on this? As in, in which ways did she not fit the bill?
    Murray writes (p. 125) that he believed strongly "that the development of a true mathematician must proceed without interruption", so he took exception to the fact that she took a break in her studies to teach. Murray doesn't explicitly say it, but reading between the lines, I imagine that there was a healthy dose of old fashioned sexism as well, so I left it a little intentionally vague and most readers will probably assume that's the reason. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "published her dissertation" — Could write the title of her dissertation here.
    I managed to find what I'm pretty sure is it and added it. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Career

[edit]
  • "Walton began her career teaching math as an instructor at Swarthmore," — Mention the year in which she was appointed, if that is available.
    We're thinking along the same wavelength—that's something I wanted to include, but it unfortunately doesn't seem to be in any of the available sources. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and then the acting dean of women." — Same as above.
    Same story, unfortunately; Lyon (p. 417) doesn't say. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She also taught at the University of Pennsylvania." — When and what did she teach?
    She presumably taught math (similar to what would be a TA role today), so I added that. I wasn't able to find dates. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she became increasingly disconnected from mathematics" — Are there specific reasons as to why she became disconnected, or a quote by Walton on this decision?
    Murray includes a brief quote from her that she felt it was "too remote from life". She also talks about how math was a boy's club, so combining that with her self-reliant attitude, she didn't have the support of a community. I allude to that in the last sentence of the early life section, but I'm not sure if it was as much a factor at Pomona. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Historian Gerda Lerner, invited for a two-week residency in February 1978, encouraged her to make the program a joint venture between the colleges, and Scripps College president John H. Chandler volunteered the college to take the lead role in the initiative, resolving funding disputes." — The sentence is too long and a little convoluted. Perhaps it could be split in two simple sentences instead?
    Done. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Walton was the president of the California Association of Woman Administrators and Counselors for two years" — Add "from YYYY to yyyy"
    Googling her name and the association returns no results with that information (not super surprising that a more minor professional association doesn't have their historical records available online). I imagine that the Claremont Colleges Library Special Collections, which houses her papers, would be able to answer that sort of question (and some of our others above), but that would be veering into clear OR territory as the records are undigitized original documents. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and was chair of the college section of the National Association of Women Deans, Administrators and Counselors." — State the year or the period in which she was the chair.
    Googling that, none of the three results include the year. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Later life

[edit]
  • "In her elderly years" — Use the specific year or the period in which she moved.
    Neither of the two Google results mention the date. Apologies I can't offer more details on so many things here; I wish I could, but as I mentioned in the note, the available sourcing is quite limited. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition and legacy

[edit]
  • "When she retired, students established the Jean B. Walton Scholarship Fund in her honor." — Mention that this was established by a few of her former students.
    Done. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]
[edit]
  • I am not sure if the Pomona College template is needed here (it does not have a link to Walton's article either).
    To avoid the navbox being too cluttered with names, I included only presidents and Sumner (who was a de facto president). There are some links that I think readers would find relevant, such as List of Pomona College people (which includes her) and Traditions of Pomona College (which mentions the weigh-in), but I've set it to collapsed so it's not too prominent. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A well-written and informative article, it should pass. That will be all for now. — The Most Comfortable Chair 09:18, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for a thorough review, The Most Comfortable Chair! Let me know if there's anything else you'd like me to address. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Final

[edit]

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:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    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:
    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 fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    A lot of research and hardwork went into writing this article. It covers all major aspects and utilizes its sources to the fullest. The quality of prose is good, and it meets the criteria. Thank you for your great work, Sdkb — The Most Comfortable Chair 04:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]

Thanks so much for your contributions, @RogueScholar! I'm very impressed you managed to find Walton's full middle name, which had eluded me (given that it's "Brosius," I can't blame her for not using it much haha). I've added those to the body.

On the matter of whether or not to include an infobox, I'm not sure if you're aware, but that was extremely controversial for many years, becoming known as the "infobox wars," and it's under discretionary sanctions for that reason. There are various arguments for and against, including the WP:DISINFOBOX essay I linked in my initial revert of the talk banners here, but to speak to your particular concern about feeding Google/voice assistants, that can be accomplished through Wikidata; I've ensured that Walton's entry now includes everything in the infobox. Beyond that, though, I don't feel that an infobox is a good fit for this article, since given the nature of Walton's work, it's better described narratively, whereas the infobox makes it look like she was mainly a mathematician by giving undue weight to e.g. her theses. It also extends nearly the entire length of the article, displacing the quote/images, something that will get worse once the table of contents is no longer at the top in New Vector. For those reasons, I'm going to restore the status quo without an infobox. I hope that helps explain my reasoning, and thanks again for improving the article. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean_Walton&oldid=1209654013"