271:
can still remember using them. I hope that most of these readers will be happy just with the table in the lede and the sections on apothecaries' measure and medical recipes. If these sections are also too densely written, then I agree there is something wrong with the article. The rest of the article basically says that internationally the situation was immensely complicated, and gives the historical development. --
309:
the map states that there were three different methods, which could be located in different parts of Europe, for determining the value of an apothecaries' ounce, I didn't easily find a section in the article that explained what these methods were. I think in one section two of them are mentioned -- the German & the French -- but what of the
Southern Italian?
308:
Another problem is that otherwise fascinating map showing the variations in the weight of an apothecaries' ounce. For one thing, it would make the illustration more useful if the values were tied to a city or country by name. Another (& perhaps more fixable) is that although the explanation for
270:
If you have specific suggestions for "dumbing down" I would be interested to hear them. Here is what I had in mind when writing the article in its present form: I expect that most readers will come from the background of the
English systems, since only these survived long enough so that some people
293:
Well, I didn't find this article hard to follow. Maybe that's just because I tend to read arid & densely-written books, but there are many articles on mathematical & philosophical topics which cause my eyes to glaze over within the first or second paragraph, so maybe there's another reason
304:
One problem I noticed is that articles are linked to many times here. Although links in different sections can be defended -- & are often reasons to ignore the rule -- the ones that most bothered me were multiple times in the same section, often closer than a couple of paragraphs apart.
245:
Sadly, this is as far as I can get. This article is far too densely written for the common reader, I'm afraid. Which, to me, is a problem with it. While I am typically not a fan of saying this, I believe it need to be "dumbed down" a bit.
237:
The end of "For a long time, medical recipes were written in Latin, often using special symbols to denote weights and measures, or even substances." is awkward. Perhaps: "often using unique symbols to denote weights, measures, or
118:
and I would like feedback as to whether the article fits the normal A-class requirements of completeness and style. I think it does, obviously, but I would like some more eyes on the article to make sure.
267:
Thanks. I changed the sentences you mentioned, with some modifications (the system was abolished in the UK before the 20th century, and it seems better to drop the substances red herring altogether).
335:
103:
180:: The article has several doubled edition abbreviations in "Notes and references" due to minor misuse of the cite book template. The template automatically adds a
70:
66:
51:
241:"The use of different measure and weight systems for different purposes…" to "The use of different measure and weight systems for various purposes…"
43:
340:
230:"In this exact form the system was in use in the United Kingdom, and also in its former colonies well into the 20th century."
321:
261:
197:
129:
297:
Another reason I liked this was that this article linked to a number of articles I never suspected existed. For example,
234:"This exact form of the system was in use in the United Kingdom, and its former colonies, well into the 20th Century."
280:
232:…is confusing. If I understand it properly, the following would be a more direct manner to express the information:
212:
168:
59:
294:
Hornoir couldn't get into it. (And no, this is not meant to disparage
Hornoir's intelligence or attention level.)
298:
193:
95:
36:
17:
276:
272:
208:
204:
165:
126:
189:
317:
256:
115:
162:
123:
114:
I've listed this article for peer review because I've just assessed it as A-class for
329:
99:
313:
249:
220:
203:
Thanks. I think I have fixed this and a few similar problems now. --
301:, which while still needing work is a fascinating topic.
98:
review of the article for issues relating to grammar and
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
85:
78:
47:
224:
I won't even pretend to understand this article, but…
137:
Peer review notified at the following WikiProjects:
336:Peer review pages with semiautomated peer reviews
8:
111:This peer review discussion has been closed.
94:A script has been used to generate a semi-
184:to the end of the text placed in the
7:
24:
312:Good luck with the article. --
102:style; it can be found on the
1:
213:21:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
198:19:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
130:13:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
357:
322:20:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
228:In the lead, the sentence…
104:automated peer review page
299:Schola Medica Salernitana
281:12:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
262:01:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
169:12:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
341:March 2009 peer reviews
178:Cite formatting remark
26:
18:Knowledge:Peer review
28:Apothecaries' system
287:Comments by llywrch
151:History of science
106:for February 2009.
86:Watch peer review
348:
260:
253:
83:
74:
55:
356:
355:
351:
350:
349:
347:
346:
345:
326:
325:
254:
247:
89:
64:
41:
35:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
354:
352:
344:
343:
338:
328:
327:
291:
290:
288:
284:
283:
268:
243:
242:
239:
235:
233:
231:
229:
216:
215:
190:Michael Devore
176:
174:
173:
172:
171:
113:
108:
107:
91:
90:
88:
34:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
353:
342:
339:
337:
334:
333:
331:
324:
323:
319:
315:
310:
306:
302:
300:
295:
289:
286:
285:
282:
278:
274:
269:
266:
265:
264:
263:
258:
252:
251:
240:
236:
227:
226:
225:
223:
222:
214:
210:
206:
202:
201:
200:
199:
195:
191:
187:
183:
179:
170:
167:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
135:
134:
133:
132:
131:
128:
125:
120:
117:
112:
105:
101:
97:
93:
92:
87:
82:
81:
77:
72:
68:
63:
62:
58:
53:
49:
45:
40:
39:
33:
32:
29:
19:
311:
307:
303:
296:
292:
248:
244:
238:substances."
219:Comments by
218:
217:
185:
181:
177:
175:
147:Pharmacology
121:
110:
109:
79:
75:
61:Article talk
60:
56:
37:
27:
48:visual edit
330:Categories
273:Hans Adler
205:Hans Adler
188:field. --
163:Physchim62
124:Physchim62
116:WP:MEASURE
143:Chemistry
96:automated
155:Medicine
122:Thanks,
314:llywrch
250:hornoir
221:Hornoir
186:edition
159:Science
139:Physics
71:history
52:history
38:Article
166:(talk)
127:(talk)
100:house
80:Watch
16:<
318:talk
277:talk
257:talk
209:talk
194:talk
67:edit
44:edit
182:.ed
332::
320:)
279:)
211:)
196:)
161:.
157:;
153:;
149:;
145:;
141:;
84:•
69:|
50:|
46:|
316:(
275:(
259:)
255:(
207:(
192:(
76:·
73:)
65:(
57:·
54:)
42:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.