Template:Did you know nominations/William Harvey Hospital
- The following discussion 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 PFHLai (talk) 07:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
William Harvey Hospital
edit
- ... that the William Harvey Hospital (pictured) in Ashford, Kent, England, was named after the doctor who discovered the blood circulatory system?
- Reviewed: Ellen Lee
5x expanded by Ritchie333 (talk), Launchballer (talk). Nominated by Ritchie333 (talk) at 14:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC).
Article new enough, long enough, fully referenced. Hook fine, verified against online source. QPQ done Image correctly licensed (I added a FoP tag). It does look like a statue of Harvey rather than a pic of the hospital, but I'll take your word for it. Good to go! Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The Commons description on the photo says that it's a statue of Harvey that stands opposite the main hospital entrance, so it isn't a picture of the hospital but a picture of the statue. Please adjust the hook so it reflects this fact. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset: I've simply changed the image to another in the article which is definitely of the hospital.--Launchballer 12:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- Launchballer, thanks; that image swap does the trick, since it is also in the article and has the proper permissions for the main page. However,
I'm troubled about the sourcing in the article. The last half of the first paragraph, starting with "The hospital struggled", uses two citations, one for each sentence. Neither supports the information in their respective sentences. The first, about the (Harvey) hospital struggling, is dated the year before Harvey opens; the second, about the old hospital eventually becoming derelict, is dated the year in which the old hospital closed and Harvey opened, and fails to support either the "derelict" claim or its eventual use, since the article is only talking about plans for the new health centre, not its later actual existence as such. With two sources in a row being problematic, I think a thorough sourcing recheck is in order once these issues have been taken care of. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Launchballer. I do believe there's a bit more work to do, though. The first cite (involving the "old old hospital"—can this be phrased less confusingly) still is from before Harvey was opened, which should be an impossibility: there's something wrong here that still needs fixing. The next sentence is better, but I don't see why is it important to mention 2009 plans for the old hospital in an article written in 2013, when those plans should have long since come to fruition and—if notable—there would be more recent sources about its having opened as a new health centre, or about the plans having fallen through or been delayed. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset: To quickly close these issues off : 1) if you stand facing the statue, the main entrance is 90 degrees to your right and slightly behind you, see the Google Maps aerial coverage here 2) Hospitals are commissioned before they are formally opened in order to test that the facilities all work - if they didn't, there would be a national scandal the minute somebody died there. The 1978 Hansard source quoting Keith Speed is a discussion taking place about what was announced to happen at the hospital once it opened. 3) I have rewritten the bit about the 1928 hospital using a better source. 4) The hospital becoming derelict is misleading, as clarified by this Ashford Borough Council source here, several maintenance buildings ceased regular operation, but the main hospital building is described therein "of local architectural and historic interest". However, this isn't an article about Old Ashford Hospital, so that's off topic.
- If there's anything else, shout now! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:22, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- New image of hospital is properly licensed for DYK, if a bit small at 100x100. (The original statue image doesn't work as a picture of the hospital, even if it's physically near the unseen entrance.) While the Keith Speed information is sourced, I admit I'd be happier if somewhere it was noted (and sourced) whether the plan to bus patients to the other hospital was retained or scrapped. Still, I don't think that should affect this DYK. I've done some very minor cleanup of that sentence, and of hyphens/dashes. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)