Talk:William Charles Osman Hill

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWilliam Charles Osman Hill has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 13, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 5, 2011.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the foremost authority on primate anatomy during the 20th century, William Charles Osman Hill, enjoyed drugstore ice cream and gardening with his wife, Yvonne?

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:William Charles Osman Hill/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 18:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VH, I'm going to review this. Will have comments up in a day or two. Sasata (talk) 18:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm looking forward to your comments. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Sasata (talk) 01:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "… and the leading authority on primate anatomy during the 20th century." (underline mine) this is a pretty big statement for the lead sentence. Couldn't we change "the" to "a"? This sentence should also say what nationality he was.
    I was going with what the source said on this one. And, to be honest, after all that I've seen in terms of primate anatomy books, I'm really not sure if anyone has ever stepped up and succeeded him. But if you feel more comfortable with "a" over "the", you may change it. Otherwise, I've added his nationality to the lead sentence. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I went ahead and changed this per your request. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, I hope you're okay with this... I think Wikipedia should stick to giving superlatives in the lead on things like mountain heights or sea depths, not about who was the best in a scientific field. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I'm fine with it. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • where was he born? Who were his parents?
    Not provided. All I had were the sources listed. As far as I can tell, nothing else is written about his life or achievements. Oh... and speaking of the sources, were you the one who sent them to me? If so, could you please send them again? The PDFs I worked from have mysteriously disappeared from both my email and my hard drive, and it's driving me nuts! I've already asked Ucucha, and he didn't send them to me, and you're the only other person I ask such favors of. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Now re-sent. Ucucha 21:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Still no information available on this. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What year did he enter university? What degrees did he get (prior to his medical degree)? What years? Did he write a thesis an anything?
    Once I can get my hands on the sources again, I will double-check. However, I suspect that the information is not provided. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The source did not explain. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This source doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.1975.tb00230.x says he had an M.D., a Ch. B, and an F.R.C.S., which would explain the multiple medical degrees. Sasata (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This has been added. Thanks for the find. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He obtained his primary medical degrees in 1924" what's a "primary" degree? Did he get more than one medical degree?
    The sources did not explain. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Addressed per above. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "… he began developing his collection of living primates." This sounds like he was collection live specimens… is this true?
    Changed "living" to "extant". – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • any details on the nature of his terminal illness?
    The only thing mentioned was diabetes, as well as "other illnesses" that made him more vulnerable to the diabetes. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "…wrote 248 publications, all articles or chapters in books…" maybe "articles" could be linked to scientific literature or explained for the reader who might not understand the significance of "article" by itself.
    Link added and changed "articles" to "academic journal articles". – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to see a "Selected works" section with some of his better known works, like the titles of his eight-volume series, his first and last publications, and anything else you think that exemplifies his academic output
    I was going to do this since once of the references supposedly listed his entire list of publications by year, but unfortunately the PDF cut off after his first publication. I have a feeling that in order to get the list, we'd have to go scan the original. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    After looking at what Ucucha sent me, it must have been in the Day article... although I still have my doubts. I really wish I could remember where I saw it. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright... we now have the list. It spans 9 pages in the journal article. The authors of the list note: "Several brief notes and nonscientific publications have knowingly been omitted from the foregoing list. All references have been checked against the original sources." The question now stands: How do you suggest adding the material? The publications are so old that I don't think any of the newer systems for checking citation counts will help determine the most heavily cited works. Should I list everything, or should I start a new list article? – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Good question, I've thought about this myself for articles on mycologists, where a list of publications would overwhelm the comparatively little biographical info available on the person. But then I worry that a list page like that might veer into WP:NOT, and work instead on something else :) I think the list is fine as is. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Despite its breadth and depth, the series was never completed." "Despite" doesn't really work as a connector.. I would tend to think, if anything, because of its breadth and depth, the series wasn't completed (know what I mean?)
    I know what you mean, and I think I made a better correction: "The series was known for its breadth and depth, however it was never completed." – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it was hoped that his widow would be able to follow through" who hoped this?
    The writers of the memorials... although I'm sure they feel they spoke for the community at large. What do you suggest? – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added another reference about the expectation for the final volume to be published, but don't know how to proceed from here. It appears it was never published. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Also, the Primate Society of Great Britain named their Osman Hill Medal award after him." Work "Also" is unnecessary. What are the criteria for this award?
    Fixed and added. – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • did he describe any species?
    Not that I can tell, but I don't know a good way to search for this. Is there a good database that will let you search by authority? – VisionHolder « talk » 05:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll see whether I can find any. However, he was lumper supreme, so I doubt it. Ucucha 21:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have added everything Ucucha found, although the IUCN considers them all as possible subspecies. Given that MSW3 is getting a little dated, I went with the IUCN taxonomy. The taxa listed by the IUCN are peer-reviewed before listing and assessing. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Several actually: Varecia variegata editorum (Osman Hill, 1953) [still a valid subspecies; perhaps described in volume 1 of Osman's magnum opus?]; a couple of Loris names: nordicus Hill, 1933 (=L. l. grandis); grandis Hill & Phillips, 1932 [now Loris lydekkerianus grandis]; nycticeboides Hill, 1942 [now L. lydekkerianus nycticeboides]; and a macaque: opisthomelas Hill, 1942 (=Macaca sinica sinica).

Excellent searching! I will try to add a mention of these soon, citing the sources below. For the ruffed lemur, I may have to cite MSW3. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citations (copied around from various places):

  • Hill, W. C. O. 1933. A monograph on the genus Loris with an account of the external, cranial and dental characters of the genus; a revision of the known forms; and the description of a new form from Northern Ceylon. Ceylon J. Sci. (Spolia Zeylanica) XVIII(1): 89–132.
  • Hill, W. C. O. 1942. The slender loris of the Horton Plains, Ceylon, Loris tardigradus nycticeboides subsp. nov. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 43: 73–78.
  • Hill, W. C. O. and W. W. A. Phillips. 1932. A new race of slender loris from the highlands of Ceylon. Ceylon J. Sci. (Spolia Zeylanica) XVII(2): 109–122.
  • Hill, W.C.O. 1942. The highland macaque of Ceylon. J. Bombay Nat. Hist, Soc., 43 : 402-406.

This is all I could find, and very likely all the extant forms he named. He may also have named some extinct forms. All in all, these are five names, of which currently three are considered valid subspecies and two synonyms. Ucucha 21:19, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible extra material Sasata (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't have access to this obituary: doi:10.1016/0047-2484(75)90065-2, do you Ucucha?
    • Yes, and already sent to VH. It's only half a page, though (which I guess is why VH didn't need to cite it for anything). Ucucha 23:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also can't access this:
Title: William Charles Osman Hill--an appreciation.
Author(s): Fiennes, R N
Source: J Med Primatol Volume: 6 Issue: 6 Pages: 325-6 Published: 1977
Me neither (at least, not in a library that I have easy access to). Ucucha 23:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • more representative publications (?)
Title: The heart and great vessels in the Strepsirhini
Author(s): HILL, W. C. O.; DAVIES, D. V.
Source: TRANS ROY SOC EDINBURGH Volume: 63 Issue: (1) Pages: 115-127 Published: 1956
Notes on the Dissection of Two Dugongs
W. C. Osman Hill
Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May, 1945), pp. 153-175
The Anatomy of Callimico goeldii (Thomas): A Primitive American Primate
W. C. Osman Hill
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol. 49, No. 5 (1959), pp. 1-116

I have added these, but again, I'm looking for a recommendation on how much to include in the "Selected publications" section. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • this link talks about OH's study of photographs of "Bigfoot"
  • I'm not sure how or where to add the Bigfoot stuff. I hope to comb Google Books today, and if enough extra tidbits start to turn up, maybe I'll have a decent amount of material to embed it with. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • there's other interesting tidbits about him that might be added from trawling through Google Books
    I will be working on this shortly. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quote grabbed from an unreliable website, but sounds interesting: "William Charles Osman-Hill an anthropologist who wrote "Nittaewo--An unsolved problem of Ceylon" (Loris. 1945), proposed that the race of savage dwarves might have been isolated species of pithecanthropus or Java man." Anything more you could find out about this? I'd like to see more in the article about what kind of discoveries he made, or what theories he came up with. Sasata (talk) 00:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information and sorry for not doing more research through Google Books. I've had mixed success with it at best in the past, but I will have to start visiting it more often from now on. I will try to add more material over the next week, if that's okay. I'm also assuming that neither of you have access to the Day article? I remember working off of it or the source, but I can't find it for the life of me. – VisionHolder « talk » 04:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do actually; I'll send it to you again shortly. Ucucha 12:33, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to look for more information about this "Nittaewo" thing. My only hope is to find it in Google Books at this point. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright... a full section on cryptozoology has been added. I did find a few other interesting things, such as his hypothesis that Native Americans were descended from Europeans (see here), but I wouldn't know where to put it, plus I don't feel it would be fair to focus only on his defunct hypotheses because of how odd they sound by today's standards. Also, he did make some interesting comments about ethnicity (see here and here), but again, the I'm not sure where to fit this little blurb into the article. As always, I'm open for suggestions. I am also awaiting feedback on how much of a "Selected publications" section to create (see above). – VisionHolder « talk » 06:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for making the additions, they are interesting and make the article more complete. I noticed you redlinked Primates: Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy, are you planning on working on that too? Anyway, the article meets GA criteria and I'll pass it now. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I would like to write about the books someday, but in order to do so I'm afraid I would need access to a lot of old book reviews I saw snippets of on Google Books, and I'm not sure what you guys would have access to them. And without access to the books themselves, that makes it even harder. And by the way, you never answered my question about the "Selected publications" section. How do you recommend developing that now that I have the 9-page list of his most noteworthy works? Create a separate list article, pick out what I think was most enlightening, or try to fit it all in? – VisionHolder « talk » 22:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did answer above somewhere in the middle. I can send you all the book reviews I can access, but yeah, I would be more difficult to write the article without the books themselves. Still, you could start something in a sandbox and finish up later when you get your hands on the books. Or, we could collaborate, since I have the books at my library. Sasata (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I missed your reply. Just so you know, I'm not satisfied with the current state of the "Selected publications" section, so I will probably take the middle ground and pick some of the articles/books that sound most important. I might even run the list by Colin Groves (if he has time) and have him pick out the most influential works. As for collaborating on the article about the 8-volume set, it would be my honor to work with you on it. However, let's aim for the summer at this point. I just wish I could find some surviving family members, or whoever holds the copyright, and get permission to use some of Yvonne's amazing artwork. – VisionHolder « talk » 23:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a plan. IIRC, Groves wrote one of the reviews I saw for the book. Sasata (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Charles_Osman_Hill&oldid=1205363949"