Talk:George Draper

Peer Review

Hi! I'm reviewing your article. I think that the section on Constitutionalism is really well done and discusses how the patient's voice/ individuality was more important. I really like the ties to humoral theory. They are clear and easy to follow. When you are discussing the four panels, are there any specifics of what he would look for and what groups of traits corresponded to specific beliefs about someone? What patterns did he look for? The section about how Draper focused more on disease susceptibility instead of race is really well written. Did you find any information about how his colleagues reacted to these ideas? I think that information could expand that section. It would emphasize that he did not follow the dominant theories at the time. In the eugenics section, could you add more about how he became a part of those organizations? You mention that his ideas did not necessarily align with those of eugenicists, but you do not discuss how he managed to become peers with them despite that difference. Overall, a really well written article that is well researched. Good job! Lwebb15 (talk) 03:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello! I am also reviewing your article.

Overall the additions are exceptionally clear cut and well written. I like how you incorporated topics that were covered in class such as Constitutionalism and eugenics. If it is possible to find more information, a definite improvement would be to flesh out the eugenics section. We talked about this in great detail over several class periods, and I think it would be plausible to extend this section with more detail of what his stance and general role was in the subject area. Really enjoyed reading this, very nice! Faithkbrown (talk) 03:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi! I'm also reviewing your article. I think that the article is generally well-written and clear, but could use a bit more information. The artcile hints at a larger movement in medicine, but its wider context is not fully fleshed out. How Draper came to develop the constitutional view of medicine is not fully discussed, and I think that this is an important element in his life. Finally, I think that the relationship to the rest of medicine at this time needs to be discussed. How did this theory view germs? Genes? I think this would be an interesting addition. Pretty cool! Ccoope52 (talk) 19:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sarf, I like your changes. In addition to the above, I think you can restructure your sentences to be a bit less repetitive. At some points, I feel like I'm reading Draper's name over and over: Draper did this, Draper believed that, etc. It's understandable since you're talking about this person, but it'd be a little more pleasant to read. Unrelated to your actual content, the page is a bit weird. At the top we have a sort of disambiguation section but below it continues with an entirely different George Draper. Maybe separate two pages where one lists all the George Drapers and the other essentially this article (Draper the physician)Dsun15 (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC).