Talk:Otto Heinrich Warburg: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:14, 9 December 2007

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Germany Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is pretty POV. I'm gonna remove POV comments pending citation. Turly-burly 09:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Otto Heinrich Warburg was an extremely interesting scientist, whose work, I am convinced, is not yet properly appreciated. As I have been able to, I've been adding to this article.

Eventually, I see his page as consisting of the following sections, or some variant thereof:

1 His origins
2 His education & service in the First World War
3 His scientific endeavors (with subsections)
in cell physiology
in cancer research
scientists he mentored
scientists with whom he collaborated
scientists who enlarged on his discoveries
4 Warburg as a person
5 The honors he received.
6 An overall evaluation of his work
7 Works by Warburg and their import
8 Works about Warburg and perhaps critiques of them.

How long this will take, I do not know; other wikipedians are most welcome to add their input.$ --Alterrabe 16:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with you there...I've been slowly adding to this page (mostly anonymously before I created an account) since it was in infancy. I was so surprised/disappointed upon checking this article for a bit more info after reading about Warburg...it was so small...If I remember correctly, the first time I checked there wasn't even an article. Glad to see it's gotten to where it is and I hope (and will do what I can to make sure) it gets to the complexity you're talking about. Warburg really has done some great work that everyone should be aware of. Thanks to everyone who's contributed. --JohnDoe0007 09:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was he right?

Warburg is regarded as some sort of a hero by the alternative cancer treatment lobby (e.g. Ralph Moss). Oddly, there is actually fairly little controversy about his experimental finding that cancer cells are highly metabolically active and absorb glucose preferentially. What is controversial is whether this is the cause of cancer. Like other outspoken early 20th century scientists, he may have been wrong. JFW | T@lk 09:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 :  I'm with you there...I've been slowly adding to this page (mostly anonymously before I created an account) since it was in infancy.  I was so surprised/disappointed upon checking this article for a bit more info after reading about Warburg...it was so small...If I remember correctly, the first time I checked there wasn't even an article.  Glad to see it's gotten to where it is and I hope (and will do what I can to make sure) it gets to the complexity you're talking about.  Warburg really has done some great work that everyone should be aware of.  Thanks to everyone who's contributed.  --[[User:JohnDoe0007|JohnDoe0007]] 09:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
+== Was he right? ==
+Warburg is regarded as some sort of a hero by the alternative cancer treatment lobby (e.g. Ralph Moss). Oddly, there is actually fairly little controversy about his experimental finding that cancer cells are highly metabolically active and absorb glucose preferentially. What is controversial is whether this is the ''cause'' of cancer. Like other outspoken early 20th century scientists, he may have been wrong. [[User:Jfdwolff|JFW]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;[[User_talk:Jfdwolff|<small>T@lk</small>]] 09:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)