Talk:Frank Engledow

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography 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 page is not unambiguously promotional, because... it reads fairly similar to most biographies, although it would benefit from a lot of copy-editing and it lacks inline references. It does list the subject's achievements, contributions to his field, and honours - but the tone does not appear unduly promotional to me. I could not find references of any criticisms or controversy of him; if there is then it should be added --Gronk Oz (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By G W Gardiner. I would be surprised that there would be any criticisms of Frank Engledow except by Winston Churchill who did not share his views on nutrition. When Engledow told Churchill in 1940 how he proposed to feed the British people, Churchill banged the table and shouted, 'A nation cannot survive on pap like that.' Churchill believed a nation fought on beef. Another remark of Churchill recorded by an aid, reads I recall, 'Every food faddist I have known has died young after a long period of premature senility.' In 1976 when I heard Engledow's own account of the interview, he said,'The nation could fight on it, did fight on it, and we now know the nation has never been fitter.' Of course Engledow had the benefit of the research of the two great Cambridge nutritionists Professor Robert McCance and Dr. Elsie Widdowson. All three lived to be 94.With the support of Engledow and others the Department of Agricultural Strategy was set up at Reading University. A committee on agricultural; Strategy was set up under the chairmanship of the biologist, Lord Rothschild and it called for papers. Engledow prepared a paper and asked me to vet the taxation and economic aspects, which I did. After subjecting me to a two hour grilling, he sent my comments with his paper to the committee. But he complained that Rothschild was too interested in figures and not enough in science and he got two colleagues to set up a think tank for him. To my amazement I was asked to take part and later to be on the editorial committee of the book, 'Britain's Future in Farming'. I have met many great scientists in my lifetime but for me Engledow was the greatest. I understand that he and Ronald Aylmer Fisher devised modern statistical techniques but Engledow complained bitterly at the way those techniques were abused by economists. 'Economists use multilinear regression analyses every parameter in which is an assumption,' he saidG W Gardiner (talk) 11:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The original references were an attempt to implement a manual index of some kind (or else it was copy-pasted from somewhere else). I have converted all of these to inline references. In the process, I found that two of them were not actually referenced in the article. They are below, with their original numbering, in case they prove useful later:--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:37, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

6 The Nuffield Foundation Triennial Report (1983-5), The Nuffield Foundation, London, 1986.

a St. Johns College, Papers of Sir Frank Leonard Engledow, notebook, box3

The references Gronk Oz saved for future use, I used on the places I originally intended in the paragraph on WW I and the paragraph on the Drapers professorship. I will try to realize some more links. Thanks for the work done. Rients Rozendal, author of the original article which is really meant to be a biography. I don't know of any controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rients rozendal (talk • contribs) 09:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This page should not be speedily deleted because it is the description of a live that indeed wasvery much devoted to causes we all should care for. I cannot help that this person Engledow has had so few contestants or foes that his biography seems to look to someone as promotional in character. Rather than delete show me that I am wrong in my appreciation of the professional life of Sir Frank Engledow.. Or come with alternative descriptions of his activities which you like better (your reason here) --Rients rozendal (talk) 15:45, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rients rozendal. The deletion tag was removed from this article a couple of days ago. So there is no further need to justify why it should be kept.--Gronk Oz (talk) 17:21, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]