User:Ianmcintosh2000/sandbox

Matthew Benne's additions to Antoine François, comte de Fourcroy article

This is a test. We will be drafting in Ian's sandbox.

Adding to my original assignment:

Fourcroy's views and studies grew from his teacher Bucquet. Fourcroy was a criticizer of earlier use of chemistry in medicine and saw great importance in studying the chemical materials of plants and animals, particularly for medical use.^[1] The majority of this work was done alongside Nicolas Louis Vauquelin, who became Fourcroy's assistant in 1784. During this period of work with Vauquelin, Fourcroy founded his own journal: La Médecine éclairée par les sciences physiques, ou Journal des découvertes relatives aux differentes parties de l'art de guérir, which detailed his investigations of chemistry and body materials. Fourcroy was convinced that "the successes of chemistry would one day change the face of medicine and result in beneficial revolution".Minniebenne (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)^[1]

Beginning paragraph about medical clinics:

In regards to the 18th century clinics of Fourcroy’s time he observed several problems. Fourcroy noticed that physicians got accustomed to seeing the diseases of an individual patient but failed in considering a large number of cases comparatively. There was also practical problems with this idea, as physician’s individual practices were insufficient in accommodating for large numbers of people with large varieties of issues.^[1] To deal with this Fourcroy proposed a program in 1791 to establish more effective clinical laboratories. Minniebenne (talk) 21:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Review by K8shep (talk) 18:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

1. What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
Good work here, with your additions to what's already there and your new paragraph. You can and should add some detail to some of your statements. Who was Vauquelin, if you know more? Or link him to this page? 2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
Flesh out your statements and give a bit more detail, that's about all I can recommend. You've done a good job! 3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
See above! Keep citing and if you can find one more source, you might use it.

Ian McIntosh's additions to Antoine François, comte de Fourcroy article

Possible Subsections for Article:

Early Life
Works
- Chemical Work
- Neurochemical and Biological Work
- Work in Laboratory and Medical Clinic Procedure
- Social Contributions
Legacy
- "The Chemical Revolution"
- Awards and Honors
- Controversy

"The Chemical Revolution"

Fourcroy was not the first to publish the phrase "Chemical revolution," even Bucquet described new developments in pneumatic chemistry in 1778 as a "great revolution in chemistry." However, it was Fourcroy that began to better describe the term by lengthening the time scale and broadening the map of nations that were contributing to the Chemical revolution in his written works. ^[3] It was Fourcroy who had initially noted the division that chemistry had undergone from natural history, concluding that the two studies no longer shared objectives nor methods. While natural historians of his era merely described and preserved that which they studied, as Fourcroy believed, it was chemists who now sought to uncover the most fundamental structures of the natural world by experimental analysis. In his publications, Fourcroy referred to many other contemporary chemists as well as those from other nations, proposing that the extensive chemical reform being done was a collaborative effort. ^[4]

Social Contributions

Outside the scope of his varied scientific work, Fourcroy was involved in the events taking place during the French Revolution, beginning his participation in 1793, where he strived to make positive impacts to French education. By the end of that year, after holding several positions in the National Convention, he was elected as the president of the Jacobin party, taking a seat on the Committee of Public Safety in the process, which he held for about ten months. He would subsequently hold other high ranking positions and directorships in educational institutes and museums during the revolutionary regime and Napoleon's government as well. As an important counselor to Bonaparte, Fourcroy was appointed Minister of Public Instruction in 1802, responsible for education in France at all levels, which he held until his death in December 1809.^[5]

Biological and Neurochemical Work

Beginning in 1791, Fourcroy would go on to publish three memoirs compounding his series of biological experiments, most of which had to do with the chemistry of the human brain. In his first, Fourcroy described the conditions of the brains of the cadavers that he studied. In his second, he would recount his continuing chemical experimentation on the fatty matter in the brain, now known as lipids, as well as the inorganic components as well. By using newer methods than the alchemical tradition that had proceeded him, such as extraction and qualitative analysis, Fourcroy concluded that the brain was composed of fatty acids in combination with bases along with recording some physical properties of the substance. His third memoir was a continuation of the separations and extractions he performed on brain matter and addition to his growing compendium of the brain's chemical constituents. One of the most fruitful results of this work was the rediscovery of phosphorus in the brain, reintroducing the 1719 discovery by Johann Thomas Hensing.^[6]

Modern References

In 2014, PBS released a three episode documentary series about the search for the basic chemical elements, highlighting seven historical scientists in particular. In episode one of The Mystery of Matter: Search for the Elements, "Out of Thin Air," Fourcroy's character is played by Yan Tual as he assists Lavoisier in his discovery of oxygen.^[7]

Review by K8shep (talk) 18:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

1. What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
You've got two strong paragraphs here. The part about the French Revolution is really interesting! He wasn't in danger of the guillotine? So many other members of the CPS got chopped. 2. What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
Watch some of your wording-- "it was chemists" not "were" and what do you mean when you say prepossessing? Clarify your language.

3. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
The language thing. And make sure to cite your sources!

Peer Review for Antoine François, comte de Fourcroy

I have added the two paragraphs that Matthew and I wrote before Monday, as well the the new "Biological and Neurochemical Work" paragraph I wrote. I also rearranged the original article in accordance with the new article subsections I outlined.

Article Evaluation

Antoine François, comte de Fourcroy

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

A noticeable amount of the article just references all tha other people that he corresponded and worked with, rather than the work he actually performed.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

What little information is present seems accurate. Big, important sections of his life (i.e. chemical discoveries, controversies in the French Revolution) are scarce at best, or missing in other cases. There is a famous report made by Fourcroy that has its own Wikipedia article that again is only briefly mentioned and could make a critical subsection of a more in depth article.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Only one post was made on the talk page, back in March 2017. Kennyling96 asks very good questions about how interesting the article and its subject are, but also wishing the article could go more in depth about the important topics mentioned in the article, but are mostly glossed over.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

This article is within the scope of WikiProject France as well as WikiProject Biography. This article has been rated as Start-Class on both project's quality scales.

Choosing an Article

Article: Antoine François, comte de Fourcroy

Partner: Matthew Benne

Sources

One Sentence Addition 3/6/2020

Although Fourcroy was not the first to publish the phrase "Chemical revolution," even his former professor J. B. M Bucquet described new developments in pneumatic chemistry in 1778 as a "great revolution in chemistry." However, it was Fourcroy that made the term widespread by lengthening the time scale and broadening the map of nations that were contributing to the Chemical revolution in his written works. ^[3]

References

^ ^a ^b ^c Buttner, J. (1992). "The programme devised in 1791 by Fourcroy for the establishment of clinical laboratories". Tractrix: Yearbook for the History of Science, Medicine, Technology, and Mathematics. 4: 39–48.
^ Legrand, Noé (1911). Les collections artistiques de la Faculté de médecine de Paris : inventaire raisonné / par Noé Legrand. Paris, France: Masson (Paris). p. 76.
^ ^a ^b Guerlac, Henry (1977). Essays and Papers in the History of Modern Science. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 405–410. ISBN 0801819148.
^ Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette (1990). "A view of the chemical revolution through contemporary textbooks: Lavoisier, Fourcroy and Chaptal". The British journal for the history of science. 23: 435–460.
^ Sourkes, Theodore (1992). "The origins of neurochemistry: The chemical study of the brain in France at the end of the 18th century". Journal of the history of medicine and allied sciences. 47: 322–339.
^ Sourkes, Theodore (1992). "The origins of neurochemistry: The chemical study of the brain in France at the end of the 18th century". Journal of the history of medicine and allied sciences. 47: 322–339.
^ Wallace, Kelly (October 13, 2014). "OPB to Premiere New PBS Chemistry Series". OPB. Retrieved April 17, 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

[:0-1] Buttner, J. (1992). "The programme devised in 1791 by Fourcroy for the establishment of clinical laboratories". Tractrix: Yearbook for the History of Science, Medicine, Technology, and Mathematics. 4: 39–48.

[2] Legrand, Noé (1911). Les collections artistiques de la Faculté de médecine de Paris : inventaire raisonné / par Noé Legrand. Paris, France: Masson (Paris). p. 76.

[:1-3] Guerlac, Henry (1977). Essays and Papers in the History of Modern Science. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 405–410. ISBN 0801819148.

[4] Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette (1990). "A view of the chemical revolution through contemporary textbooks: Lavoisier, Fourcroy and Chaptal". The British journal for the history of science. 23: 435–460.

[5] Sourkes, Theodore (1992). "The origins of neurochemistry: The chemical study of the brain in France at the end of the 18th century". Journal of the history of medicine and allied sciences. 47: 322–339.

[6] Sourkes, Theodore (1992). "The origins of neurochemistry: The chemical study of the brain in France at the end of the 18th century". Journal of the history of medicine and allied sciences. 47: 322–339.

[7] Wallace, Kelly (October 13, 2014). "OPB to Premiere New PBS Chemistry Series". OPB. Retrieved April 17, 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]