This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm removing the phrase
"something you are not likely to hear from your doctor"
because it is an opinion. Mambo5king 18:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Some crummy grammar replaced with marginally better... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.189.211 ( talk) 18:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I am removing the word "controversial" from this sentence: Taubes is known for his controversial 2002 New York Times Magazine article What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie? which questioned the efficacy and health benefits of low-fat diets and was seen as defending the Atkins diet against the medical establishment.
In my opinion, that word is such a cop-out. Who thinks it is controversial? Who are we quoting? Is that opinion or fact?—Preceding unsigned comment added by DougRisk ( talk • contribs) 17:22, December 9, 2007
It would be nice if links were added to the article to existing online streaming video of Gary Taubes. These include classroom lectures and TV interviews. They can be found on Google video, YouTube, and other sources. There is also a radio interview online from the CBC. 69.110.0.187 ( talk) 06:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know if the UK title "The Diet Delusion" ( ISBN 0-09-189141-8) is "Good Calories, Bad Calories" under a different name, or something else? Whichever, it seems to me some mention should be made of it. Paul Magnussen ( talk) 21:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
It is the same book under two different titles, according to this reference SkyeWaye ( talk) 18:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
An editor at an ip address has deleted approximately one third of the material in Taubes article claiming self-promotion and advertising. I have reverted the changes twice as I see no evidence of self promotion or advertising and find the material deleted useful to someone who wishes to read material on Taubes using the deleted references and external links. Comments and discussion are most appreciated. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 23:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
An editor at [ 87.194.7.142] has reverted Gary Taubes's article to the version by [ 94.193.135.203] a couple of times. This deletes approximately half the material, references, and links in the article. I have asked [ 87.194.7.142] to discuss changes before future edits to the article here on this talk page and noted if he is the same editor he has already been warned with respect to wp:ew. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 18:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
An editor at [ 87.194.14.248] has reverted Gary Taubes's article to the version by [ 94.193.135.203]. This deletes approximately half the material, references, and links in the article. I have asked [ 87.194.14.248] to discuss changes on this talk page before deleting material from this article. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 04:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The editor at [ 87.194.14.248] has deleted a majority of the Gary_Taubes article twice more today. He has not discussed these deletions except in the edit summary saying "RV edits by Gary Taubes' PR agency", which is an incorrect assertion. Three warnings have been placed on his talk page with no effect, other than his blanking his talk page after the first two warnings. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 21:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I found an article [ [4]] about controversy surrounding Gary Taubes. Could someone add this to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.55.182.248 ( talk) 19:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The body of the article concentrates on Taubes' writings on nutrition. The summary paragraph mentions the cold fusion affair, which is not otherwise mentioned in the article. I have seen material online which suggests that Taubes was less than candid in his dealings with cold fusion researchers, before writing that at least one of them had acted fraudulently. Can anyone provide a section on this objectívely presenting all sides of this affair? -- TraceyR ( talk) 11:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Regardless of how one interprets the statements about Mr. Taubes' educational background, he obviously is superbly well educated. Nonetheless, one of the key sentences is vague in the way that people sometimes seek to mislead about their academic background. I refer to, Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard University and aerospace engineering at Stanford University (MS, 1978). Did he receive his bachelor's degree from Harvard? Was it in applied physics? And ordinarily I would read this without question as saying that his Stanford MS was, indeed, in aerospace engineering, but coming off the vagueness (dodginess?) concerning Harvard, I don't feel quite certain. If there is something being evaded here, it could not possibly diminish the prestige of an education that began at Harvard and included masters degrees from Stanford and Columbia. The article would be improved by being more precise and unambiguous on these small points of what degrees were received where and in what fields. Considering the extraordinary impact of Taubes' challenge to nearly the entire medical and nutritional community, people are going to want to know everything they can about his background and who he is. 107.197.156.7 ( talk) 14:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
If we're going to put an article about Taubes organization NUSI, a link to that organization's web page in external links is justified. We should probably add a section on NUSI CarbShark ( talk) 19:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the article states, "Some of the views propounded by Taubes are inconsistent with known science." One of the main points of Taubes's books is that the "known science" is unreliable because it arose from flawed studies. For example, thanks to Ancel Keys, the "known science" for fifty years told us that animal fat in the diet was harmful and led to heart disease. Taubes minutely dissects the faults in Keys's arguments in his book Why We Get Fat, and elsewhere. Younggoldchip ( talk) 12:15, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
The line in the introduction paragraph:
"Some of the views advocated by Taubes are inconsistent with known science surrounding obesity."
is spoken in Wikipedia's voice, WP:Assert, when it cites the opinion of a researcher in a book review, rather than a citation of the general view of modern science. It probably isn't even appropriate for the summary, especially considering this is a biography of a living person.
I notice that editor Alexbrn was edit warring about this same phrase with another Wikipedia editor prior. I'd like to hear why anyone believe the citation is esteemed enough to represent general and modern scientific view. Gsonnenf ( talk) 17:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I can't make sense of your statement, and its unrelated to the article. We can't have productive discussions with continuous accusations. Gsonnenf ( talk) 22:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 ( talk) 07:29, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm removing the phrase
"something you are not likely to hear from your doctor"
because it is an opinion. Mambo5king 18:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Some crummy grammar replaced with marginally better... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.189.211 ( talk) 18:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I am removing the word "controversial" from this sentence: Taubes is known for his controversial 2002 New York Times Magazine article What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie? which questioned the efficacy and health benefits of low-fat diets and was seen as defending the Atkins diet against the medical establishment.
In my opinion, that word is such a cop-out. Who thinks it is controversial? Who are we quoting? Is that opinion or fact?—Preceding unsigned comment added by DougRisk ( talk • contribs) 17:22, December 9, 2007
It would be nice if links were added to the article to existing online streaming video of Gary Taubes. These include classroom lectures and TV interviews. They can be found on Google video, YouTube, and other sources. There is also a radio interview online from the CBC. 69.110.0.187 ( talk) 06:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know if the UK title "The Diet Delusion" ( ISBN 0-09-189141-8) is "Good Calories, Bad Calories" under a different name, or something else? Whichever, it seems to me some mention should be made of it. Paul Magnussen ( talk) 21:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
It is the same book under two different titles, according to this reference SkyeWaye ( talk) 18:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
An editor at an ip address has deleted approximately one third of the material in Taubes article claiming self-promotion and advertising. I have reverted the changes twice as I see no evidence of self promotion or advertising and find the material deleted useful to someone who wishes to read material on Taubes using the deleted references and external links. Comments and discussion are most appreciated. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 23:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
An editor at [ 87.194.7.142] has reverted Gary Taubes's article to the version by [ 94.193.135.203] a couple of times. This deletes approximately half the material, references, and links in the article. I have asked [ 87.194.7.142] to discuss changes before future edits to the article here on this talk page and noted if he is the same editor he has already been warned with respect to wp:ew. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 18:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
An editor at [ 87.194.14.248] has reverted Gary Taubes's article to the version by [ 94.193.135.203]. This deletes approximately half the material, references, and links in the article. I have asked [ 87.194.14.248] to discuss changes on this talk page before deleting material from this article. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 04:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The editor at [ 87.194.14.248] has deleted a majority of the Gary_Taubes article twice more today. He has not discussed these deletions except in the edit summary saying "RV edits by Gary Taubes' PR agency", which is an incorrect assertion. Three warnings have been placed on his talk page with no effect, other than his blanking his talk page after the first two warnings. Darrell_Greenwood ( talk) 21:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I found an article [ [4]] about controversy surrounding Gary Taubes. Could someone add this to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.55.182.248 ( talk) 19:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The body of the article concentrates on Taubes' writings on nutrition. The summary paragraph mentions the cold fusion affair, which is not otherwise mentioned in the article. I have seen material online which suggests that Taubes was less than candid in his dealings with cold fusion researchers, before writing that at least one of them had acted fraudulently. Can anyone provide a section on this objectívely presenting all sides of this affair? -- TraceyR ( talk) 11:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Regardless of how one interprets the statements about Mr. Taubes' educational background, he obviously is superbly well educated. Nonetheless, one of the key sentences is vague in the way that people sometimes seek to mislead about their academic background. I refer to, Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard University and aerospace engineering at Stanford University (MS, 1978). Did he receive his bachelor's degree from Harvard? Was it in applied physics? And ordinarily I would read this without question as saying that his Stanford MS was, indeed, in aerospace engineering, but coming off the vagueness (dodginess?) concerning Harvard, I don't feel quite certain. If there is something being evaded here, it could not possibly diminish the prestige of an education that began at Harvard and included masters degrees from Stanford and Columbia. The article would be improved by being more precise and unambiguous on these small points of what degrees were received where and in what fields. Considering the extraordinary impact of Taubes' challenge to nearly the entire medical and nutritional community, people are going to want to know everything they can about his background and who he is. 107.197.156.7 ( talk) 14:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
If we're going to put an article about Taubes organization NUSI, a link to that organization's web page in external links is justified. We should probably add a section on NUSI CarbShark ( talk) 19:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the article states, "Some of the views propounded by Taubes are inconsistent with known science." One of the main points of Taubes's books is that the "known science" is unreliable because it arose from flawed studies. For example, thanks to Ancel Keys, the "known science" for fifty years told us that animal fat in the diet was harmful and led to heart disease. Taubes minutely dissects the faults in Keys's arguments in his book Why We Get Fat, and elsewhere. Younggoldchip ( talk) 12:15, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
The line in the introduction paragraph:
"Some of the views advocated by Taubes are inconsistent with known science surrounding obesity."
is spoken in Wikipedia's voice, WP:Assert, when it cites the opinion of a researcher in a book review, rather than a citation of the general view of modern science. It probably isn't even appropriate for the summary, especially considering this is a biography of a living person.
I notice that editor Alexbrn was edit warring about this same phrase with another Wikipedia editor prior. I'd like to hear why anyone believe the citation is esteemed enough to represent general and modern scientific view. Gsonnenf ( talk) 17:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I can't make sense of your statement, and its unrelated to the article. We can't have productive discussions with continuous accusations. Gsonnenf ( talk) 22:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I have commenced a tidy-up of the Bibliography section using cite templates. Capitalization and punctuation follow standard cataloguing rules in AACR2 and RDA, as much as Wikipedia templates allow it. ISBNs and other persistent identifiers, where available, are commented out, but still available for reference. This is a work in progress; feel free to continue. Sunwin1960 ( talk) 07:29, 27 April 2022 (UTC)