Talk:Jessie Murray

Jessie Murray is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 15, 2023.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 9, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
August 31, 2023	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Usernameunique (talk · contribs) 21:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Under "Known for," should her suffrage activism be added?
- Possibly. I always think less is more in an IB (if an article should have one at all), and I think it has more impact by focussing on the core, rather than bloating out. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

close friend Julia Turner — Seems that they were more than friends. What about "partner" or "life partner"?
- Because the sources are not clear. They probably were a couple, but without clear steer from the sources (which is difficult because there is no evidence they were anything other than close friends), we can't go any further than what the sources say. - SchroCat (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and education: 1867–1910

Seems a bit odd to preface a section about 43 of the 53 years of a person's life with "early life"
- Tweaked to widen the description. - SchroCat (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any reason that Murray took her mother's surname? Seems unusual.
- Nothing that was mentioned in the sources. - SchroCat (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Frances Murray and her children travelled to Edinburgh — What about Hildyard?
- The source says "Frances Murray and her children returned to Scotland, and were living in Edinburgh in 1881"; I can't find any sources that include Hildyard. Being in the army he may have returned with them, or joined them later. - SchroCat (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any word on what happened between 1885 and 1898?
- Nothing that I could find. - SchroCat (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is it correct to call Valentine Murray's "biographer"? I think of that as implying one who wrote a book, not an article.
- Yes, I think so. The article is a biography of her, rather than about something else with odd snippets about her. ONDB editors are biographers too, and this isn't too far away. - SchroCat (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Valentine, she spends a really tortured paragraph trying to avoid calling Murray gay. Is there anything that is more direct about Murray's relationship with Turner?
- As above, there is nothing in the sources that outlines the relationship, so we can't double guess to fill in the gap. - SchroCat (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Murray also attended the lectures — When?
- It's not very clear, unfortunately. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Women's suffrage activism

a militant organisation for women's suffrage which eschewed violence — In what ways is a non-violent militant group militant?
- Breaking the law but not being violent about it - non-payment of taxes and chaining themselves to the railings of Parliament were two of the favoured tactics. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
29 of the statements also included details of violence that included indecency. — This is perhaps a bit too vague; after all, one might consider any violence against protesters to be per se indecent.
- I'm not so sure about the connection between the two, but I've added "sexual" to clarify the point. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Their findings were published — Where?
- In a book. Not sure whether we need to dig down into that detail or not. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - It could be handy to at least cite it; after all, most articles include the names of their subjects' significant publications. I was about to helpfully point you to its title and citation information, but seems like you have that well under control. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK. I've added a footnote with the full title and the explanation that it wasn't under her name, but that of the conciliation committee. - SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Medico-Psychological Clinic

treatment by isotonized seawater — What's this?
- I've added a link to clarify. - SchroCat (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The clinic was pioneering, according to The Institute of Psychoanalysis. — In what way(s)? When was the assessment made?
- There are no futher details
the Association of Registered Medical Women, the Psycho-Medical Society — red-link worthy?
- Looks like you might have missed this comment --Usernameunique (talk) 04:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - ~~Oops, yes I did. I'll see if there is enough info to warrant an article and link it if there is. Thanks for pointing this out. - SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]
  - Linked both: both were folded into other organisations, so I've linked on to those. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Final years

Are there any other sources (e.g., reviews, or retrospective commentary) discussing Married Love, or Murray's preface? It's a lot more frank that I would have expected for 1918. Also, did Murray publish anything else?
- There is nothing discussing the preface, which is the only part we should be concerned with here; Married Love may be worth an article, but I don't know enugh about the subject, or the coverage of it, to know whether it meets GNG. - SchroCat (talk)

References

9: This isn't the Daily Chronicle article, but it's close, and has some extra information.
- Thanks for that; I've added a little extra from it. - SchroCat (talk) 08:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
12, 19: These seem fairly long for short cites.
- I'm OK with them - they are clear what they point to. - SchroCat (talk) 07:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Interesting article, SchroCat. A little on the short side, but I assume that's mainly due to what's in the sources. Minor points above --Usernameunique (talk) 21:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks very much. Yes, unfortunately there are very limited sources for this one. I've addressed a couple of points, and will look at the remainder in the morning. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I've covered all the points - at least on a first sweep. Please let me know if I've missed any, or if you want further tweaks done. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks, SchroCat. Looks good. I've left one suggestion above, along with a reminder about another that may have been missed. They're quite minor, however, so I'll go ahead and pass this now. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks Usernameunique. Yes, I missed the link - I'll have a look around to see what there is, and I've added a note with the full title. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction ?

Hello SchroCat, Thank you for this page and well done. I wondered wether you could mention in the introduction that she was a trained doctor and worked as a doctor as soon as she obtained her MBBS in 1909. Best regards, --Pierrette13 (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Pierrette13, that's very kind of you. I'll have a look at the sources again to see if they actually say she practiced from 1909 onwards (unless you have something to hand that we can use). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 18:09, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SchroCat, [Sorry, English is not my native language]. I have the same references as you. I wrote a page on the French-speaking Wikipedia here, but a while ago (and I realized today that there was this page because of a modification on Wikidata). It seems to me that doctor and MD are different titles : she was allowed to practice medicine since her MBBS (for instance Raitt, 2004, p.6) and so she did, at 14 Endsleigh Street, and she belonged to several professional medical associations (Valentine, p.147). For instance Donald Winnicott was a doctor, but never passed his MD. At that time, MD was a sort of research diploma. Best regards, --Pierrette13 (talk) 18:50, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]