Talk:Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2020 and 13 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aliylo. Peer reviewers: Allykwong.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Feedback on your article

@Aliylo: This is unbelievable. You built this from Scratch!?

You should take a look at this list of suggestions for polishing your article which is helpful but it really looks like you've done almost all of this. Do a final pass for typos and then make your article live. Please waste no time! This is great work! You've really done Wikipedia and the world a service here. I can't believe there wasn't an article about this! —mako๛ 23:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK

@Aliylo: You should really consider nominating this article for Wikipedia:Did you know which would put it on the front page of Wikipedia and cause lots of people to view it. Are you interested? It would need to happen in the next week but you could get help with this! WikiEd has some material on this that might be useful and they are willing to help out with the process. If you're interested, I'll ping our contact there who can help. —mako๛ 23:14, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi mako,

I am definitely interested! I will talk a look at the link. Thanks! Aliylo (talk) 00:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

@Shalor (Wiki Ed): Greetings! Do you think that this article would be a good candidate for WP:DYK? I've never done one before but the WikiEd material seems to suggest you might be able to help. —mako๛ 01:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

• @Aliylo and Benjamin Mako Hill: Wow! I think that this would be great to nominate! I can launch the nomination if you like! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Shalor (Wiki Ed): Please go ahead and launch it and {{ping}} both of us when you do! —mako๛ 22:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Shalor (Wiki Ed): Thank you so much for your help! Aliylo (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

• @Aliylo and Benjamin Mako Hill: No problem! Also quick note - the fourth source shows up as just ""Shibboleth Authentication Request". login.offcampus.lib.washington.edu". Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Awesome. I fixed that citation. —mako๛ 20:26, 19 February 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: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees helped to establish what the practice of informed consent was supposed to look like in the practice of modern medicine? [1]
  • ALT1:... that the term "informed consent" was coined during the 1957 court case Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees? [2]

• Comment: I'm launching this for the student and instructor to help ease them through the process, this should count as one of their grace nominations.

Created by Aliylo (talk). Nominated by Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) at 20:19, 19 February 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: The article was new enough to mainspace when nominated and is easily long enough (~9,000 characters) and otherwise eligible. The article's claims are supported by suitable citations; I'll assume good faith with regard to the paywalled sources, which are substantially supported by the ones I can access. An additional citation is needed. The content is presented in an appropriately neutral fashion, without e.g. taking one litigant's side. I don't see any signs of plagiarism from online sources; the high-scoring hits on the Earwig tool are all matches on the names of cases and institutions and other stock phrases not easily paraphrased. The hooks are both supported by citations, and ALT1 is the more interesting.

A good guideline is to try to include some sort of citation for each paragraph of text, so the article needs to make clear the source for the second paragraph of "History". Wikipedia style frowns on including external links in the prose body of an article (except in citations), so you can just cut the sentence in "Hospital Visit/ Procedure" that reads "More details of the procedure can be found here."

This is close to meeting the standard! A little work and it should be able to run at DYK. The article is now ready to go for DYK. Bryan Rutherford (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Bryanrutherford0:, which part needs an additional citation? I removed the mention of the external link. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Looks like you got it; there was an unsupported paragraph in "History". Thanks! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)