Talk:Richard Owen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Richard Owen article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

To-do list for Richard Owen:	edit · history · watch · refresh
A lead section is needed
Priority 3

	This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Political motives

One bit could be better supported-- "Working class militants were trumpeting man's monkey origins. To crush these ideas, Owen, as President-elect of the Royal Association, announced his authoritative anatomical studies of primate brains, showing that humans were not just a separate species but a separate sub-class." Does anyone know what specific groups of folks found Darwin's ideas politically supportive in the early days, or have a cite about him addressing these (socialist?) political implications? 68.35.68.100 05:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edward Blythe

I removed the following statement:

(Edward Blyth is normally credited for being the first naturalist to have officially developed the idea between 1835-1837.)

First, a controversy about who first published the ideas of natural selection, etc. doesn't really fit into an article about Richard Owen; and second (more importantly) it needs to have a reliable reference.Glendoremus 21:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

"Edward Blyth accepted the principle that species could be modified over time, and his writings had a major influence on Charles Darwin. Blyth wrote three major articles on natural selection, published in 'The Magazine of Natural History' between 1835 and 1837.[1][2])."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Blyth

Within one of the first paragraphs of the article, with two references; note the title of the second reference:

"An Attempt to Classify the "Varieties" of Animals, with Observations on the Marked Seasonal and Other Changes Which Naturally Take Place in Various British Species, and Which Do Not Constitute Varieties"...

And, secondly, given the fact that the statement previous seemed to be crediting Darwin as the sole formulator for natural selection (which is a pretty common mistake, even in most published articles and books), it felt proper to correct it here.

Considering that the whole article is outlining who became more predominant in naturalist circles due to perceived correctness of ideas, it seems right to at least point out that Darwin wasn't original in his sole claim to fame. More could have been brought up about his appropriating his grandfather Erasmus' ideas on evolution, or how he essentially took key concepts from others without giving credit (the same as what Owen was accused of). The short blurb is enough to lead people onto the Blyth article and better information.

Both criteria for your objections have been met and answered; hence, I think the short reference should be returned. Kh123

• I don't see that this article makes any claim that Darwin was the first(or only)--it simply says: "This was one of the many influences which lead Darwin to later formulate his own ideas on the concept of natural selection" (emphasis mine). This article is about Owen and how his theories/beliefs/work interacted with Darwin's. In addition, the statement I removed says "normally credited with being the first..."--that just is not correct as the previous commentor points out.Glendoremus 14:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It says "one of the many influences" and "his own"... after I edited and added those statements.

Previously, it said: "This was a spur to the inception of Darwin's theory of natural selection." Period. Hence, it makes Darwin to seem the sole formulator, which is why I changed it (My login on those changes is clearly marked in the edit history page).

It is a common mistake for many science writers to think that Darwin was the "great inventor" of natural selection and macro evolution, rather than the "great synthesizer" of those concepts (and even this wasn't so notable, truth be told). It is like crediting A.G. Bell for inventions in electricity rather than the appropriator that he was of others' work for his own ends. Yet it is a popular misconception that he was *the* man, and normally credited as "the first" in many minds. Same with Darwin.

All of the info which meets your previous objections has been either in the hyperlinks provided or in the edit log. I still think adding a hyperlink to Blyth's work and comment on Darwin not being the sole originator of the hypothesis meets the criteria of wikipedia's desire for correct, encyclopedic content. What say you? Kh123