CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

William James Rees

British zoologist

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionNov 27, 2024
Entity authorityQ8013486 ↗
Source-derived summary

William James Rees (1913–1967) was a British hydroid and cephalopod researcher at the Natural History Museum in London. He described a number of species, including Sepia dubia, Sepia sewelli, and Sepia thurstoni.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “William James Rees” as british zoologist. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1913, 1967—that can be checked directly. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1913. The account is most persuasive where William, James and Rees can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as british zoologist. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 27, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q8013486. VIAF identifies the subject as 259020948. The Library of Congress control number is n80076310. 2 of 4 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1913 and 1967.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “William James Rees”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow William James Rees primary sources, William James Rees archive and William research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “William James Rees”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “William James Rees” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.