Talk:Michael Woodruff

message: Specifically, a photo of Michael Woodruff is needed.  I am in contact with the staff of http://renux.dmed.ed.ac.uk/EdREN/Unitbits/historyweb/transplant.html who may be able to supply the photo displayed there.  However, I felt the need for a backup plan.  Cool3 20:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  older entries 

message: Strangely I have been unable to find a place of death for the Wikipedia:Persondata for this article. I can't find this information in any sources either, though I presume he died in Edinburgh. I don't want to state that until it's confirmed: is it in an obituary somewhere? TheGrappler 23:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can personally confirm that Woodruff died in Edinburgh as he was an acquaintance of mine and I was informed at the time by a friend who attended the funeral.  However, I don't have a true source for that so it might count as original research.  Anyway, he died in Edinburgh for whatever that's worth. Cool3 02:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of death 

message: This has been tagged as an article needing an infobox.  However, many biographical articles, such as that for Robert Oppenheimer, another FA Scientist article, do not have infoboxes.  I personally don't think an infobox would add much to this particular article (although in many cases they are quite useful).  Any thoughts? Cool3 19:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree, though I'm not generally a fan of the way infoboxes are used anyway...InvictaHOG 17:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: Any photograph of Woodruff from his time in Australia would be public domain by now.  Unfortunately there are no such images online; according to Cool3 (no longer active at Wikipediia but I've contacted him through e-mail) there are probably some Australian photos in his autobiography "Nothing Venture Nothing Win" but I didn't get a chance to pick up a copy before the featured date.--Pharos 23:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free image possibility 

message: The first three footnotes are named within the article, but don't seem to be defined anywhere... Has an edit inadvertently removed them...?  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 13:51, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pages don't get protected when they're on the main page. Quadzilla99 19:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First three footnotes 

message: Is he someone that the average educated Brit would have heard of?  Like Jarvik?  Hard to tell from the article text.  I just want to know if the article is something that is pretty trivial that has just been researched into a good article?  (which is fine.)  Or if the guy is something special.  I just have a hard time telling this from the article.  If anything my impression is that he's just some guy.
Sorry, if this sounds disjointed.  (I have a thought, but am having a hard time expressing it.)  Please respond to the spirit.  Thanks.
Oh...and I don't mind if the guy is notable, but some people don't know him that well.  Wiki should be great at bringing things like that so that young people know more of past.  But like I said...the article just doesn't sing...
72.82.57.163 (talk) 01:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: He's someone the average physician or medical student would have heard of, but he's not really that well-known anymore.  There was a time (back when he was performing ground-breaking surgery) that he was something of a celebrity, and your average man on the street would have heard of him.  He is something special; he was truly a significant researcher, and one of the last "academic surgeons".  His papers are still cited today, but that said he's still just no longer famous.  Hope that helps. Cool3 (talk) 01:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How notable is he? 

message: Noting here my removal of an edit from December 2010. It might be true, but for a featured article a source is needed, so leaving it here in case anyone reading this is able to supply a source for that and to consider whether it should be re-added to the article. Carcharoth (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit from December 2012 needs checking 

message: This is a 2006 FA, whose FAC nominator has not edited since 2010.  This article does not meet current standards. I asked a year ago at WT:MED if anyone would review the article, but got no takers.  The article has several problems, and I am listing it at WP:FARGIVEN as part of WP:URFA/2020A.
* Extreme reliance on one source. Basically the entire article is sourced to one person: Peter Morris (surgeon), who was not independent of the subject. 
* Newer sources that have not been accounted for.  I listed three in the Further reading section, but I found quite a few more with a simple google search.
* Self-sourcing: the entire passage about his work to prevent malnutrition among POWs is cited to ... him.  There are other sources that discuss the matter. Similar for the claim that "successfully used hypnotism as the sole means of anæsthesia for a wide range of dental and surgical procedures".
* Attention to minor MOS details like wikilinking, and consistent citation style is needed.
* Excess detail on his children. 
*  and similar editorializing statements are found more than once.  can't be sourced to self; editorializing. Let the facts speak for themselves; he is clearly an important surgeon, and it is unfortunate that our bio on him is not written to the highest sourcing standards, as this should be an FA. 
* There are unanswered queries on this talk page; it seems no one is shepherding this article.
SandyGeorgia (Talk)  01:49, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article review needed