Talk:Herbert Callen

Alzheimer's disease

Hey Nerd271, I appreciate you contributing a lot of content towards this physicist who is one of my favorites. You reverted my edit of removing a line `According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Alzheimer's remained a leading cause of death in the United States in 2016.[10]'. My edit was with the notion that this line belongs to the page of Alzheimer's disease and not here.

Your explanation of reverting was `Previous edition was better'. Could you please tell me how writing about Alzheimer's disease in Herbert Callen's page is relevant to Herbert Callen? Mahesh gandikota (talk) 06:15, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mahesh gandikota: It puts things on context for us, at least those of us who are curious. It remains a rather common cause of death in the U.S. today. Nerd271 (talk) 13:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Nerd271: This is one of the pillars of wikipedia - neutrality: ``Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view. We strive for articles in an impartial tone that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence. We avoid advocacy, and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them. In some areas there may be just one well-recognized point of view; in others, we describe multiple points of view, presenting each accurately and in context rather than as "the truth" or "the best view". All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is about a living person. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong on Wikipedia."

Maybe you imply by `at least those of us who are curious' that I am not curious. Everyone of us are curious. That's why you provided the link to Alzheimer's in this article. I totally agree with you on that. However, I still do not agree with you adding the line about Alzheimer's diseases in USA on the page of a physicist.

Again, I appreciate the work you have put for this page. That still stands. Mahesh gandikota (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mahesh gandikota: Nope, I never said anything about you not being curious. It is there to provide some context for those who are curious. Whether or not a reader cares is up to him. In any case, besides this point, your revision is not better because it is simply not more neutral. He died and left behind some family. The end. How is that not neutral? Nerd271 (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Nerd271: I agree with you stating the death and leaving behind some family. That is completely neutral. My contention with you is just about one line. That Alzheimer's disease is a leading cause of death in USA. Again, my contention is not even with that line. It is a very important piece of information. However, it does not belong to this page but to the Alzhiemer's page.

In the limiting case, for example, if we start adding such lines to every paragraph, you could maybe see how out of shape this page would become. ``Manhattan project - the project which resulted in the death of thousands of Hiroshima and Nagasaki residents." I would agree that that is an important line. However that line would not belong to this page. And so on and so forth. Would you agree that such kind of tails to all paragraphs in this article would make this article look bad? Mahesh gandikota (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

...and helped end the Second World War in the Pacific. Sure. But certain factions are going to be engaging in polemics about it, so it is better to leave it out. Wikipedia is not intended to be a battlefield. This bit about Alzheimer's disease is a true and directly relevant and is not contested. Nerd271 (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Given that we are not agreeing, is it fine with you if I put this up for a third opinion? This is not personal to me. I would respect other editors' opinions. It will bring more substance to the debate. Mahesh gandikota (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Nerd271: I have now placed the request in WP:3. Hope that's fine with you. Mahesh gandikota (talk) 17:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Not a problem for me. Nerd271 (talk) 18:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Response to Third Opinion Request:

Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Herbert Callen and cannot recall any prior interaction with the editors involved in this discussion which might bias my response. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here. One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'."

Opinion: The "According to the Center for Disease Control..." sentence is, for purpose of this article, improper editorializing. Though supported by an apparently reliable source, its introduction into this article amounts to original research about Herbert Callen as it amounts to a Wikipedia editor's comment upon the facts of the article. Readers who want more information about Alzheimer's Disease can click through the link to the article about it. On the other hand, the use of the word "suffered" in the first sentence of the paragraph is also original research and "battled" is preferable since it is supported by "struggle" in the New York Times obituary. I hate to be so cold-blooded as to say this but if Callen struggled, he probably suffered - as do most Alzheimer's victims (including my mother, who also died from it) - but we don't know that as a fact as to Callen in particular so it's original research and a word that says what the source says is the proper choice.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TransporterMan (TALK) 18:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, fine. I'll remove the "extra" bit about Alzheimer's disease. But the rest shall stay. 11 years is a long time to fight a disease that happens to be a leading cause of death in his country. Nerd271 (talk) 18:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

@TransporterMan: Thanks for weighing in. I agree that using the word `battled' is preferable than `suffered' given that there is a reference for the former. Mahesh gandikota (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)