Talk:Charles Whitman

Author's notice

I copied the following from the edit summary:

20:53, 17 June 2010 John Calvin Moore (Talk | contribs) (28,520 bytes) (I wrote 90% of the Wikipedia article and posted the photos and docs there, this will be done with the same. I made a major overhaul of the WP article here, licensing should be here for Citizen)

--Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Nomination mistake?

I'm not sure if John meant to nominate the article for approval, or if he doesn't totally understand the metadata and it was a mistake. If it was intended, then it will need other Editors as he has written the majority of the article. Also, the metadata will need updating to include a specific version, rather than just the URL of the article itself. --Chris Key 12:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

When I fixed the Metadata, I also noticed the missing permanent link, but since this will need Constable interaction, I simply left it as it is. --Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

In many ways, this is a very historically significant article. While I'm quite aware of the Bath incident, it is the first spree killing of which many Americans are aware. As such, it will be even more valuable tied to other articles on mass murder, some of which certainly need to be written.

It's not uncommon for people to bring material from WP and put it up for immediate Approval, but that rarely if ever happens, the simplest reason being that new Citizens may not be aware of formatting conventions here, and of the titles of relevant existing articles that should be wikilinked back and forth. If nothing else, even if one is an Editor, one cannot nominate, without other Editors, an article to which one contributed substantially.

While we certainly don't demand that everything written by an expert be sourced, some of the statements here do seem speculative and should either be made more specific or sourced. As a CZ: History Workgroup Editor, I'd say this is a status 2 (developing) article. I'd actively like to work with it, which will mean that three Editors will have to approve -- that should not be a problem. Coincidentally, I've been doing some work in neurology and oncology, and this was an impetus to start the glioblastoma article, to which I'll be adding. Howard C. Berkowitz 14:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Autopsy problems section

From the article: ==Autopsy Problems==

At the Cook Funeral Home on August 2, 1966, an autopsy was performed as requested in Whitman's suicide note and approved by Whitman's father, Charles Adolf Whitman, and performed by Dr. Chenar, who found a brain tumor and initially reported as an astrocytoma brain tumor in the Autopsy Protocol Report, although results from the subsequent Governor's report investigation doctor's revealed the tumor was a grade 4 Glioblastoma Multiforme that conceivably could have been a factor in Whitman's actions.

Although Whitman had been prescribed drugs, and Whitman had a vial containing dextroamphetamine on his body after his death, the autopsy could not establish if he had consumed any drugs prior to the shooting. Whitman's bodily fluids had been removed and his body embalmed prior to the autopsy, so there was no urine to test for the amphetamines. However, it was revealed during the autopsy that Whitman had a Glioblastoma tumor in the hypothalamus region of his brain. Some have theorized that this may have been pressed against the nearby amygdala, which can have an effect on fight/flight responses. This has led some neurologists to speculate that his medical condition was in some way responsible for the attacks, as well as his personal and social frames of reference.

A few clarifications: a glioblastoma (or glioblastoma multiforme) is a grade IV astrocytoma, by the WHO classification. It also may be reported as a grade IV glioma. The text suggests there is some conflict in the report, but each of the mention of a tumor refers to the same histopathological diagnosis.

"Body fluids" is adequate; amphetamine testing can be done on blood as well.

I think a bit more clarification of the speculation about the hypothalamic tumor pressing on the amygdala is needed. The reference is a bit confusing: as a PhD, Rhawn Joseph could not be a neurologist. What neurologists are doing the speculation?

Diagnoses and interpretation in general

From the lede, after updating wikilinks, "By today's standards, his personality would have been deemed narcissistic with borderline personality features NOS, (not otherwise specified)." I believe a specific diagnosis, especially in a mixed DSM category, needs sourcing, or at least a substantial analysis. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing "to Approve" notice

I am removing the Editorial to Approve stuff -- there is no date, and, as a complete newcomer to CZ, I think he is simply not at home with the Metadata process. Hayford Peirce 16:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Document images

I'd like to hear from others on this, but I hesitate to put up document images rather than bibliographic citations to the documents contained in them. There's nothing wrong with putting the image in a Gallery subpage, but I'm not sure what the image adds to the main article. Howard C. Berkowitz 22:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)