Talk:Ignaz Semmelweis

The ignoring of womens' contributions to science & medicine continues ...

Semmelweis observed a decreased mortality rate in puerperal fever where pregnancies were attended to by nurses/midwives outside of the doctor based hospital system, credit for the introduction of hand washing to western health practices belongs to the nurses (women) who knew what to do to decrease deaths and washed their hands to the mockery of most of the (male) medical profession. It would have originally been known during the years of the crusades when Arabic medicine (far more advanced than western) regularly utilised handwashing … so giving the credit to one person, is incorrect and offensive to those women who struggled to be heard. What happened to 'on the shoulders of giants' - everything has a context and to celebrate one person is simple, patriarchal and how women's history became lost in the first place. I also have personal experience of doctor's ignoring nurses rules about cross infection in the 1980's when they would visit MRSA patients without washing their hands before and after visiting other patients. The system has changed with the increased numbers of women doctors and male nurses but ignoring the historical contribution of women health professionals perpetuates a myth and a stereotype from which we need to continually move away. Its complex and not that simple, but thank you Semmelweis for observing women's practices and then trying to introduce it to your colleagues who then treated you like they treated intelligent women, with mockery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.199.218.186 (talk) 22:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_washing_in_Judaism Jews have been practicing hand washing for 6,000 years 99.16.240.53 (talk) 15:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Austro-Hungarian, not Austrian-Hungarian

Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis[A] (German: [ɪˈɡnaːts ˈzɛml̩vaɪs]; Hungarian: Semmelweis Ignác Fülöp; 1 July 1818 – 13 August 1865) was an Austrian-Hungarian[2][3] physician and scientist, now known as an early pioneer of antiseptic procedures. It should be changed to: Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis[A] (German: [ɪˈɡnaːts ˈzɛml̩vaɪs]; Hungarian: Semmelweis Ignác Fülöp; 1 July 1818 – 13 August 1865) was an Austro-Hungarian[2][3] physician and scientist, now known as an early pioneer of antiseptic procedures. NoobMaster69420666 (talk) 23:16, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Comment: the current article version is just "... a Hungarian physician...", reflecting the existing single source, semmelweis.org, which says: "was a Hungarian physician". In the two sources previously used, Encyclopædia Britannica says: "(born July 1, 1818, Buda, Hungary, Austrian Empire [now Budapest, Hungary]... German Hungarian physician... " while encyclopedia.com just says: "(b. Buda, Hungary..." with no nationality ascribed. From 1804 the Kingdom of Hungary was part of Francis II's Austrian Empire. Although Buda was still largely German in the early 19th century, and he was of German ancestry, it might be simpler to describe him as Hungarian? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:54, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Changing nationalities requires a consensus based on reliable sources. As {{u|Martinevans123|| notes, the sources on this are mixed and discussion is necessary before a change is made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:19, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

The whole attempt was failed at the beginnig, first beucase sources tell otherwise, on the other hand it is about nationality/citizenship in the lead, not ethnicity. Hungary was a crownland of the Austrian Empire, but unlike other crownlands, it was separate country. His ethnic background is described in the core, WP policies does not even support it necessarily in the lead.(KIENGIR (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC))

IP edit

Dear IP,

please check the Austrian Empire and Kingdom of Hungary (1526–1867) articles. Hungary has been a separate country, Regnum Independens, with is own citizenship, related on to the Austrian empire by the Monarch from the Habsburg House. The source you have given to your false claim is ignorable, since it describes Austria-Hungary before it has been created (1867), so it is failed from the beginning. Discuss here first from now on...(KIENGIR (talk) 18:41, 26 March 2020 (UTC))

This is incorrect. Citizenship as a concept is fairly young. The Kingdom of Hungary was governed by the Habsburg family and despite being allowed to its own government it was under the jurisdiction of the Austrian Empire. A seperate citizenship for the Kingdom of Hungary was established as a concession to Hungarians as part of the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867. There is a reason why this was part of the deal. It didn't exist before. It is unclear if and what citizenship Semmelweis specifically has adopted. If there is any evidence that he chose to adopt the citizenship of the Kingdom of Hungary after that had been established in 1867 a source needs to be added for that. Same with your claims about Eisenstadt any many other edits you have made they are not based on facts and evidence but nationalistic talkinpoints. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.115.44.137 (talk) 18:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

No, the Imperial Diet had no jurisdiction over Hungary, Hungary was administered by it's on Diet and ruled by their own constituion. Again, there has been never a common citzenship, or Austrian citizenship ever introduced in Hungary, you follow a common falsity and mistake that are commited a long time ago by those who does not really are professional in the internal affairs of Austria or Hungary. Franz Liszt has been also a Hungarian citizen solely and also referred to it openly his papers also declared being the subject of Hungary, etc. Semmelwess was a Hungarian subject by birth, and there is not any evidence he ever changed his official status. Sorry, there is not any natinoalistic point here, if not your behalf.(KIENGIR (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2020 (UTC))

Bad (Unfounded) Addition?

The second paragraph appears to be from a meme going around Facebook... It is unclear if the meme came from this article, or if the article had the meme pasted into it.

However it happened, there are falsehoods and misleading statements throughout the second paragraph... Semmelweis did have a theory about what was going on. There is nothing to suggest mortality dropped to under 1% directly as a result of Semmelweis' hand washing advancement. I changed this to 2% to match the data cited later in the article and in the puerperal fever article, but it may be better to delete the whole paragraph and replace with supportable facts. HumanJHawkins (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)