Talk:Juan Rosai

Like Resume

This article attracted my attention when it was added to the List of Cornell University people. While it's not blatantly self-promotional, I found it to have too much peacockery. My edits were intended to at least clear up the lead a bit, though the rest of the article needs to be revised more, I think. —Notyourbroom (talk) 04:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Changes after Like Resume

This is article was not intended to have peacockery. Actually, the subject of this biography is well known by pathologists, as well as his strong influence in the field of diagnostic surgical pathology. However, I made a revision, cleaning and edition in order to avoid confusion. Thanks Rodrigja

Willing to Clean Up Further

I was one of Dr. Rosai's work associates, and I am also an experienced editor. I would be happy to help alter the wording of this piece so that it has a neutral tone, while still retaining the essence of Rosai's many contributions. However, I need for the person who is currently trying to change the text to sign off on this entry, in order to accomplish that task.

--Mrwick1 (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Cleaning

Mrwick1: please proceed, I will be interested to look at the changes after. Rodrigja (talk —Preceding undated comment added 21:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC).

Done

See what you think. I believe that the piece would benefit from inclusion of a section on Rosai's personal life and non-medical interests as well. Cheers, --Mrwick1 (talk) 02:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

My current view

As a neutral third party, I've been watching this article develop, and I think it's gotten much better compared to its original state. I do not think any critical issues exist at all, and I think it has become quite a good, balanced, well-referenced article.

The only concern I have is that there is an over-reliance on external links. Wikipedia generally discourages the use of external links, especially when they are used in-line in articles (i.e., rather than being listed in a separate "External Links" section). I cleaned up two of them using ISSN and ISBN templates and removed a third one, but several others still remain. Wherever possible, a strategy other than linking to an external webpage should be used.

Good job all around, though—this is an article to be proud of.

Best, —Notyourbroom (talk) 04:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your continuing comments. My concern about this piece in its current form is that the first paragraph is redundant, vis-a-vis the following text, and it is also somewhat awkwardly worded. I agree that the use of the word "significant" (as I had inserted) is rather "puffy," and probably better left out. Best, --Mrwick1 (talk) 22:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Improvements to the Article

Thanks to the contributions of Notyourbroom and Mrwick1, this article have been notoriously improved. I cleaned further some of the external links, and maintained only the ones that does not have an article in Wikipedia. By the way, the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology (USCAP) should have an article. Perhaps Mrwick1 may start it. Also, I modified the first paragraph. Regarding this paragraph, the importance that Dr Rosai has in the development of pathology and teaching of generations of surgical pathologists trained under him at Yale, Cornell and Memorial Sloan-Ketterin Cancer Center is a fact that will be further recognized by his peers in the next USCAP annual meeting. I am available to discuss and accept any improvement.

---

Rodrigja (talk) 00:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)