The Wikipedia article on the Royal Commission on Animal Magnetism is a community edited encyclopedic account of the 1784 French royal commission, chaired by Benjamin Franklin, that investigated Franz Anton Mesmer's claims of a magnetic healing fluid and concluded the effects observed came from imagination rather than any physical force. Its strength is that a well developed Wikipedia article on a documented historical investigation of this stature draws together primary and secondary sources on the commission's actual membership, method and published findings into one accessible summary. Its limit is that Wikipedia is a continuously and anonymously editable reference rather than a peer reviewed source, so it is well suited to the commission's basic history and conclusions but a claim resting on close reading of the commissioners' own report or its long term influence on the study of suggestion and hypnosis needs the historical scholarship the article itself would need to cite.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
A Wikipedia reference article on the 1784 Royal Commission on Animal Magnetism, cited only for basic checkable facts (Lavoisier's role, the commission's composition, the manner and detail of its work), alongside the Franklin Commission's own report as the primary record. The tier-3 use, a general encyclopedia entry, not independent historical scholarship. NotesWikipedia's article on Royal Commission on Animal Magnetism. A perpetually community-edited reference page rather than a peer-reviewed publication; use for standard, uncontroversial facts about Royal Commission on Animal Magnetism (biographical detail, dates, common definitions), not as the source for a contested or specialist scholarly claim.
Citation
AuthorWikipedia contributors
PublisherWikipedia
URLhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Animal_Magnetism
Source Typereference
Claims Backed By This Source (14 claims)
This source backs 14 claims across the atlas. As facts: 9 well-attested. As cited relationships: 2 critiqued Here. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Disciplines, 2 claims: 1 critiqued Here, 1 general references.
- Historical Figures, 2 claims: 1 critiqued Here, 1 general references.
- Studies, 2 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Articles, 1 claims: 1 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.