Talk:James Doull

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Philosophy: Philosophers / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Contemporary philosophy

"outside the philosophical mainstream"

I don't follow this sentence: "Indeed his Hegelian views (especially his judgement that Hegel had been successful in his attempt to articulate in the form of self-developing concepts the inner content of the Christian revelation) were no doubt a major reason that he was regarded as outside the philosophical mainstream." Does having Hegelian views put someone outside the philosophical mainstream? That isn't reasonable. Or was it really the part in brackets? in which case the sentence should be rewritten to claim that clearly. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a leprosy scientist, right?

In 1939 this paper was published:

Doull, James A.; Megrail, Emerson. "Inoculation of human leprosy into the Syrian hamster". International Journal of Leprosy. 1939 (7): 509-512.

I think this James A. Doull is not the James A. Doull in the paper. This one would have been 21 years old - not impossible but unlikely - and also this one was not a laboratory scientist. Also the paper was published in Ohio. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:57, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, the leprosy scientist was James Angus Doull (1889–1963), an infectious disease physician and researcher, who is named in this citation:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586871/

death of wife

his widow Floy Andrews Doull just died. https://memorials.sladesfuneralhome.ca/floy-doull/4784964/ --2607:FEA8:FF01:4B63:285D:9A37:642F:F3D (talk) 17:59, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]