Talk:Hwang Woo-suk

Hwang's laboratory (questionable) techniques

128.54.56.153 added the work "(questionable)" to the heading of this section. Though I think that most of the contributions from this user are welcome, I do not think that this particular edit was appropriate, as it adds a value judgment to the section heading.

Also, it is not very grammatical.

If the techniques were "questionable", this information can be presented in the section text, but I do not think it belongs in the heading.

I reverted the change, only to have the user revert it back. I'm loathe to start an revert war, so I would like to ask other people's input in this matter.

Is "Hwang's laboratory (questionable) techniques" an appropriate header, or should it be kept at "Hwang's laboratory techniques"? Baeksu (talk) 23:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Pub Med

Regarding "...appearing nine times as a senior author on PubMed." PubMed is not a publication. It is a search engine. This implies that the subject was published in or on PubMed, when this isn't something that happens. Barring any objections, I intend to remove this statement. Rex Manning (talk) 06:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Which type of stem cell is being discussed?

Maybe distinguish which type of stem cell is being discussed by using "embryonic" or "adult" to modify the phrase "stem cell" wherever it is being used.

A quick Internet search will show that some scientists, institutions work on embryonic stem cells (derived from embryos), and some scientists, institutions work on adult stem cells (derived from unbilical cords, other human non-embryonic sources). (Some may work on both kinds of stem cells also.)

These different types of stem cells have been known for at least the last few years. Also what is NOT "news" is making embryonic-like (pluripotent) stem cells from adult stem cells.

Many of your readers will be familiar with these and other terms describing different stem cells and will expect the article writers to know them.Lindisfarnelibrary (talk) 00:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

---

Hwang Woo-Suk → Hwang Woo-suk — modern capitalization of Korean names. See this Guardian article Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Capitalisation per WP:NC-KO. PC78 (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Court upholds sentence of disgraced scientist

Some recent news regarding the punishment of Hwang Woo-suk:

Court upholds sentence of disgraced scientist

Note that the Wikipedia article on Hwang Woo-suk mentions that he was sentenced to a two years suspended prison sentence, whereas the article in the JoongAng Daily mentions that Hwang Woo-suk was sentenced to 18 months in jail (suspended for two years).

It may also be interesting to add the following link to the Wikipedia article on Hwang Woo-suk:

South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle

143.248.157.242 (talk) 07:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I noticed my external link to the commentary "South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle" has been removed. In my opinion, the referenced article provides good insight into Hwang Woo-Suk’s descent into scientific misconduct, based on interviews undertaken in Korea in 2005. I therefore decided to revert the change. Note that this article is not an editorial. Also, note that some of the other external links are no longer working. 192.249.18.76 (talk) 03:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)