Talk:Mary Carson Breckinridge

Please add citations

Hi Lightning12 and thanks for adding information to this article. However none of your additions have citations or references to sources. Please add references. Unreferenced material has to be removed from articles as it reduces the value of the article. Thanks very much. MurielMary (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mary Carson Breckinridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060822102833/http://www.frontiernursing.org/History/MaryBreckinridge.shtm to http://www.frontiernursing.org/History/MaryBreckinridge.shtm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070829113923/http://www.kentuckypress.com/viewbook.cfm?Category_ID=1&Group=7&ID=278 to http://www.kentuckypress.com/viewbook.cfm?Category_ID=1&Group=7&ID=278

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Adding Images

Do images in the article enhance understanding of the topic? The single image so far contained could use further captioning, and the article would benefit from more images. I am planning to look for other images on Wikimedia. If I cannot find them, I will strive to add them. I will be looking for images of Breckenridge or members of FNS on horseback, since that was the mode of transportation the midwives used and were known for. I'll also look for an image of the postage stamp created in her honor. JECason (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Restructuring and Expanding

I have been working in my sandbox to restructure and expand the biography of Mary Breckinridge. I sought to separate her family and professional life so that the latter stands on its own more fully. I also expanded a formal and practical education section because so much of her training and preparation for FNS came from a visiting/observing plan she set for herself. I have also framed her European experience as a model for the KY program she established. Finally, in selecting biographical content, I emphasized how early experiences set the stage for her achievements. I will plan to move the revised article over a section at a time. JECason (talk) 23:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC) JECason (talk) 23:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks great JECason! From a fellow student Women in Red course *Yseut229* (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mary Carson Breckinridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 1namesake1 (talk · contribs) 00:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I plan on reviewing this article; I hope to have a complete review ready by June 13, 2020. 1namesake1 (talk) 00:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

GA review 1. It is well written with a clear, easy-to-understand style. I just wanted to point a few areas where there might be a bit more concision and clarification: a. In the early childhood section, the last sentence in paragraph 2 is slightly awkward; perhaps a change in verb tense would be helpful. b. In the early childhood section, perhaps paragraphs 3 and 4 could be switched in order so that the main point is stated first and the supporting details follow. c. In the early childhood section, paragraph 3 could be a little bit more concise and reviewed to eliminate redundancies. d. In the marriage section, the first sentence may be redundant - perhaps repeats info in early childhood section. e. In the formal education section, in paragraph 2, I was unsure about the relationship between the ACDF and the steps she took to gain the experience needed to create the FNS.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

3. It is broad in its coverage. I think the article does a great job of providing a look at her life in a way that shows how her varied life experiences prepared her to create such an important and lasting contribution to women's healthcare.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias.

5. It is stable.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

Overall: This article is filled with verifiable information and research; it presents its subject in a comprehensive manner and clearly shows the remarkable nature of Mary Carson Breckinridge's life and life's work. This is an important addition to American medical history and the history of women healthcare professionals. Pass/Fail: Pass 1namesake1 (talk) 03:53, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

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: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Mary Carson Breckinridge's work with the Frontier Nursing Service dramatically reduced infant and maternal mortality in Appalachia at a comparatively low cost? Source: ([Dye, Nancy Schrom (Winter 1983). "Mary Breckinridge, The Frontier Nursing Service and the Introduction of Nurse-Midwifery in the United States". Bulletin of the History of Medicine. 57.4: 485–507 – via JSTOR]).
  • ALT1:... that Mary Carson Breckinridge modeled the Frontier Nursing Service on European models, based on her post-war work with the American Committee for Devastated France and her tour of The Highlands and Islands Medical and Nursing Service in Scotland. Source: [(Breckinridge, Mary (1952). Wide Neighborhoods: A Story of the Frontier Nursing Service. Univ of Kentucky Press)].
  • ALT2:... that Mary Carson Breckinridge's model for public health in rural Kentucky placed trained nurse-midwives at the center of the system? Source: [(Breckinridge, Mary (1952). Wide Neighborhoods: A Story of the Frontier Nursing Service. Univ of Kentucky Press)].
  • ALT3:... that the nurse midwives in Kentucky traveled many miles on horseback to serve the women and families who were inaccessible by road or rail? Source: [(Norman, Macdonald (2014). The great book of Skye : from the island to the world : people and place on a Scottish island. Maclean, Cailean. Portree. ISBN 978-0952868798. OCLC 897503159)].

• Reviewed: "QPQ exempt"

Improved to Good Article status by JECason (talk). Self-nominated at 21:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC).

• Nominated within 7 days of receiving GA icon. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, there are numerous statements that need sourcing, as well as a whole paragraph that needs citations per Rule D2.
• ALT0 is interesting. Please tell me the page number on which the hook fact appears so I can check it. ALT1 and 2 read very technically and not so interestingly. I have struck ALT3 because it's a shame not to mention the subject specifically on the main page. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credit. Yoninah (talk) 14:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
• I will double check citations and respond very soon with more information.JECason
• The citation to lowering infant and maternal mortality appears on pages 501-02 of Dye's article. The whole article narrates the intentional process of achieving that goal, but the goal is reported and cites to the historical record on those pages. I'm still a novice editor going through this process of the first time. I'll check on placing a page number inside the article as well, but if I should be responding with a page number somewhere other than here, please let me know. JECason —Preceding undated comment added 21:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

• @JECason: Thank you for the page numbers. Where does it say anything about low cost?
• There are still a number of "citation needed" tags that need to be taken care of. Yoninah (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

• The nominator is no longer editing. Marking this nomination for closure as unsuccessful, although if the nominator reappears before the template is closed, we can continue. Yoninah (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I think we should wait another week and see what happens. Two weeks since the nominator's last edit isn't really that long. I am curious how the article passed a GA review with multiple areas not cited. Flibirigit (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: I looked at the GA review and I wouldn't call it much of one. SL93 (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Flibirigit, Yoninah, SL93 is absolutely right. This was a GA review by a first-time reviewer who passed it even having mentioned some issues in their review, which were not required to be fixed. Further, with a single paragraph lead section in an article of its size, it failed to meet MOS:LEAD, one of the GA criteria, in addition to the citation issues. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The nominator edited yesterday so I left one final message for them. If there's still no response in a week this can probably be closed as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Nominator has not returned since their last edit and has been unable to respond to messages. Given this along with concerns about the initial GA review, unless another editor decides to adopt this nomination, it is now marked for closure as abandoned. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)