Talk:Hippocrates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Hippocrates is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2007.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Core  This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group (marked as Top-importance).
 
Note icon
This article has had a peer review which is now archived.
WikiProject Medicine (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject History of Science (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
e·h·w·Stock post message.svg To-do:
  • Confusing bit from 1911 'bout philosophy.
  • gymnastics -- adams9
  • Page number for cite 56.
  • Read Smith's The Hippocratic Tradition
  • Read The Embassy
  • Review Picture
  • Describe the personality types he described or create seperate article about them
Archive

Archives


Before rewrite

GA failed[edit]

When compared with the good articles' criteria, the article is :

1. Well written?: Needs a copyedit
2. Factually accurate?: Pass (Not always sticking to facts)
I don't know what you mean here. If you're talking about the biographical info, see the article's peer review. There, editors clamoured for more text, true or not.
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: Fail
Which of the NPOV subcriteria does it fail?
5. Article stability? Fail (last 50 modifications ... big edits)
The article does not change significantly "from day to day". Nothing really major has been done in a week. It is under peer review and eventually to be up for FAC. It is thus being improved, but it is also relatively consistent and reliably stable.
6. Images?: Pass


== Additional comments :

  • Only Hippocrates' approximate birth date, birth place and profession are known for certain., how can approximations be known for certain, it doesn't make sense. This is especially true if the next line states that historians have come to accept some idea.
I disagree. Shakespeare is also known for certain to have been born near April 23, but the exact date is uncertain. ==
  • Historians accept that he actually existed, is original research.
I don't see why. Makuria, featured, contains the sentence, "What this merged kingdom should be called is unclear in both contemporary sources and among modern historians."
  • In He may have died in Larissa at the age of 83 or 90, though his death date is speculated with very little certainty; some sources state that he lived to be over 100 years old., why is a source given for 100 yo but not for the two previous years mentioned?
The source is not for 100 yrs old, but for the whole sentence... you'll notice that the source is after the sentence, not within it.
  • Here Hippocrates is often hailed as the first physician to reject superstitious beliefs and practice medicine based only on scientific theory., how can he be hailed if there is no citation given?
You mean, of course, "how does the reader know that for certain"... I shall get a source for this. Fixed.
  • The line Scientific Hippocrates did deny the divine origin of all sickness. needs rephrasing.
Fixed
  • Solving the specify tag of the line These predictions were based ... is necessary.
Will be done. Done!
  • Explanation is needed for Crises occur on critical days, usually a fixed time after the contraction of the disease.
I don't think I can make this any clearer. The critical day is the day on which a crisis occurs. These days usually occur after a fixed period. It's no more complicated than this.
  • Rephrase this line according to this doctrine, the body contains within itself the power get better by rebalancing the four humours.
Done? Is this good enough?
  • There is an Adams mentioned here : Adams goes one step further and calls it sometimes “obscure”. but not before and it is not wikilinked/we don't know who he is.
Fixed.
  • The text is well-written in some sections but other lack in quality. This discrepancy is not ideal especially because the readers will be rebutted to read the whole article.

Even though this article is broad enough and sounds good and is long, it still lacks in copyediting and a few other fields to reach the GA status. For more explanation, please send a message to my talk page. Good luck with the re-working of the article. Lincher 13:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I shall cite those two things and copyedit... then I'd like to have it re-evaluated. Thanks for the suggestions! -- Rmrfstar 23:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

FYI someone, probably a child, added "i like ponies" to the top paragraph of the biography. 66.25.190.57 (talk) 16:42, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Re-review[edit]

I agree more text is necessary for the biographical section. Maybe part of the legends section should be included in the biographical section in order to let the readers know (who come only for a brief understanding of the guy) that much that is said about him is mythical & unreliable.
I have provided a link to the Legends section next to the sentence which notes apocryphal information exists.
OK for stability, OK for NPOV issues.
Maybe if it looked like Historians can only ascertain Hippocrates' approximate birth date, birth place and profession.
That is euphemistic.
You wrote Historians accept that he actually existed and I questioned? You compared it with Makuria, which I totally agree compared to. But I add : are there historians that do not believe that he ever existed and if so who and why? If not, then there is no necessity for this as it is like saying oranges are orange, IMO. Just answer here if you don't feel this should be disputed or has no take in the article's bettering.
Not that I've heard of: it's not disputed, as far as I know.
About Crises occur on critical days, usually a fixed time after the contraction of the disease., is it a concept taken out of his corpus ... if so, giving a citation would solve the understanding. For I, when reading this, am lost as to what are these critical days. Are they days after which disease you will have crises and these number of days differ from one disease to another?
I changed it a little.
Maybe more info about the curing of Democritus. More examples of how he did his medicine like how he took the heart beat, talk about gallbladder stones.
Democritus has been mentioned.
More information about how medecine was done before him and what changed.
Where did he practice medicine?
Everywhere he went... I have mentioned this.
Comparison with Polycletus & Phidias who were also practicing medicine around that time would be useful.
Were the doctors of that time paid?
He was.
Part of the legend : It is said that he would have burnt one of the librairies Kos or Cnidus.
This is in the article.
What about his father & grand father who are said, and that almost could be factual, to have initiated him to medicine for they were doctors.
They have already been mentioned.
Did he leave (that is almost known for sure) Kos? What was the reason of his departure?
These, too.
It is said that he knew about the Eleusinian Mysteries, and that should be mentioned in the text.
He is said to have interveined in the conflict that brought his son to make a declaration involving his forefathers in 413 BC.
More text you can find information on : Bio, Bio.

Anyway, I think the article would probably pass the GA since enough is given to let reviewers know that what was missing was fixed and much can be added to broaden the article but it still has the essentials. Lincher 17:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I think if anyone should pass it, that person is you. In the meantime, I shall continue to improve it by your suggestions. -- Rmrfstar 17:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

GA awarded[edit]

This little bit of review on the article was refreshing enough to give it more balance, more coverage and a better feel overall. It now meets the requirements of WIAGA. Cheers, Lincher 00:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your work. -- Rmrfstar 01:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Hippocrates[edit]

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 18:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

No cultural references are being deleted from the article. How would this model be useful under these circumstances? -- Rmrfstar 17:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

FAC[edit]

I think it needs a lot of work, but nothing major.

Introduction:

1."and prescribing good habits for physicians"

  • Isn't the oath about ethics, primarily? -à "and prescribing ethical practices for physicians."
    • It largely defined the practices that a physician could partake in, so I generalized the sentence to accomodate the Oath, though it still doesn't describe only the Oath.

Biography: 1.was born around the year 460 BC on the island of Kos,"

  • Should you say, the Greek Island of Kos? Was it Greek then, and isn't it now?
    • It says earlier that he was Greek; I wouldn't want to be repetetive.
      • I don't think you're being repetitive by mentioning the Greek Island of Kos, as he could have been a Greek even if born outside of Greece at the time. I'm trying to make it easier on the reader, and repetition is not as dangerous as it sounds, when it's used as necessary.
        • OK! -- Rmrfstar 23:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

2."and was a famous physician and teacher of medicine"

  • "and became a famous physician and teacher of medicine" or "who became a famous physician and teacher of medicine."
    • Fixed.

3."Later biographers of Hippocrates were Suidas,"

  • Is Suidias a biographer or is a biography of Hippocrates included in the Suidas?
    • According to Garrison, he's a biographer, but I think it's an error probably due to the often missing definite article in front of "Suidas". I tried to fix the article accordingly.

4."Later biographers of Hippocrates were Suidas, John Tzetzes, and Aristotle.[2][7]"

  • These should be listed chronologically, Aristotle, Suidas, John Tzetzes, and included dates, "Later biographies of Hippocrates were written by Artistotle in the whatever century, by the authors of the Suidas in the 10th century, and by John Tzetzes in the whatever century.
    • Fixed... see above.
      • This section is not clear due to inconsistencies: "Soranus of Ephesus, a Greek gynecologist of 2nd century AD,[6] was Hippocrates's first biographer and is the source of most information on Hippocrates's person. Biographies of Hippocrates were found in the writings of Aristotle in the fourth century BC, in the Suidas of the tenth century AD, and by John Tzetzes of the twelfth century AD.[2][7] Soranus stated that Hippocrates's father was Heraclides, a physician; his mother was Praxitela, daughter of Phenaretis. The two sons of Hippocrates, Thessalus and Draco, and his son-in-law, Polybus, were his students. According to Galen, a later physician, Polybus was Hippocrates’s true successor while Thessalus and Draco each had a son named Hippocrates.[8][9]

according to Hipocratic Lives and Legends by Jody Rubin Pinault Soranus and Tzetzes stated, that Hippocrates was the son of Heracleides and Phainarete OneNorthBear (talk) 10:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

        • According to the text Soranus was Hippocrates's first biographer, but the very next sentence says that Aristotle was a biographer some 6 centuries earlier. I believe that Aristotle included biographical information about Hippocrates in some of his works which were not specifically about Hippocrates, but the first biography was by Soranus (actually I thought it was the only one?) but I'm not sure, and will let you research and correct as necessary. Another biography cannot precede the first one.
          • Fixed (by someone else) -- Rmrfstar 23:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

5."Soranus said that Hippocrates learned medicine from his father and grandfather, and other subjects from Democritus and Gorgias."

  • "and studied other subjects with the Greek philosophers Democritus and Gorgias."
    • Done.

6."Hippocrates was probably trained at the Asklepieion of Kos, and took lessons from Herodicus of Selymbria."

  • Should asklepieion be capitalized, or should it be at the aslepieion in Kos? >"and took lessons from the Thracian physician Herodicus of Selymbria"
    • Fixed.

7."Plato, Hippocrates's only contemporary to mention him, describes him as an Asklepiad.[10]"

  • Awkward, imo. Is Plato the only contemporaneous mention of Hippocrates? I didn't know that. How about "The only contemporaneous mention of Hippocrates is in Plato's (insert which work), where Plate describes Hippocrates as an Asklepiad. Is that a follower of Asclepius? Put in a common and define the term.

KP Botany 17:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

    • The real issue is that the term "Asklepiad"'s definition is under much contention: it may mean he was a priest of a healing temple or a member of a cult or a descendant of Asclepius, or a successful doctor, or something else. No one knows. Should I put the term in quotes? -- Rmrfstar 21:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Quotes? Blech, all the pretty prose in the world won't help Wikipedians over-using quotes. I see the page it links to explains the ambiguity of its meaning. I will try to look something up, and maybe someone has a better suggestion than just ignoring its unclarifiable status without resorting to quotes.
        • All right. -- Rmrfstar 23:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I will be off for holidays, and don't know how much I'll post. Be patient, I think the article has needs polished and clarified, by I believe you've done most of the hard work, and seem to have the knowledge and sources already. KP Botany 23:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Image of Tree of Hippocrates[edit]

I've changed the image to the one I made myself, not because I'm such a narcist but because the upper half of the other picture was covered with overhanging leafs. Mine isn't perfect either.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

This one is better... thanks! -- Rmrfstar 16:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Impact[edit]

What was his impact? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.224.189 (talkcontribs)

The answer to this is very long, but is answered in full in the article. The sections "Professionalism", "Direct contributions to medicine", "Image" and "Namkesakes" deal with Hippocrates' "impact" most directly. -- Rmrfstar 16:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Somebody (91.124.144.90 ?) is really messing around with this page[edit]

There are NUMEROUS vandalisms here, even after some reversions.

Why is it that whenever I type 'Hippocrates' into the Wikipedia Search it comes up with an article saying "Why do I hate Canada so much"?

Hippocrates in the hadith[edit]

The material on Hippocrates here should be included. Any ideas? Arrow740 03:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, why?--Svetovid 15:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so. That section talks only about conception, a relatively narrow subject when compared to the history of all medicine. And this article already mentions that Hippocrates' doctrines were adopted by Arabs. Is this truly not sufficient? -- Rmrfstar 15:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


Hippocrates & Astrology[edit]

Hi Rmrfstar. I added content and references on Hippocrates related to his medical practices and teaching. Thanks for leaving me a message. I hope to be able to add more content to improve the page even further, and would enjoy your comments. Thanks.Theo 06:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I just looked over KillerChihuahua's reversions, and I noticed a few problems with your additions as well.
  • First of all, you must use inline citations for all your contributions, especially to an Featured Article which is already rigorously sourced.
  • Second, this article is about Hippocrates, not astrology. Hundreds of words of basic astrology doctrine should not be included, especially in the lede.
  • I don't see a reason to re-label the heading, ===The Physical Body's Humorism, Crisis of Health, and Healing===. What was your reasoning?
  • Again, in all the research for the article as it now stands, I saw very, very little information on how much Hippocrates advanced astrology. I suggest you find secondary and tertiary sources which discuss this, in addition to translations of the Corpus.
  • If you want to add a medium-sized section on specifically astrology in Hippocrates' teachings, that's fine with me; but the information should not be dispersed everywhere throughout the article.
  • Also remember that this article is on Hippocrates, not the Hippocratic Corpus, and that mention in the latter does not signify importance to the former, ie. if you find secondary sources which discuss the matter of astrology in the Corpus, we should not necessarily include that information in the article on Hippocrates. Wait until you find stuff discussing Hippocrates, the person, and his astrological convictions, not those of his disciples and the physicians of other schools.
  • Last, the astrology quote which is attributed to Hippocrates should be left out until it is sourced to him and not the Corpus. -- Rmrfstar 13:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Proctoscopy: review needed[edit]

I was told to add to this article a section on Hippocrates' advancement of proctoscopy and endoscopy So, I wrote and referenced the following paragraph for the section "Direct Contributions to Medicine". I would like some peer review to make sure I don't decrease the quality of the article in including it.

Proctology and Endoscopy

The Hippocratic school of medicine described well the ailments of the human rectum and the treatment thereof, despite the school's poor theory of medicine. Hemorrhoids, for instance, though believed to be caused by an excess of bile and phlegm, were treated by Hippocratic physicians in relatively advanced ways.[1][2] Cautery and excision are described in the Hippocratic Corpus, in addition to the preferred methods: ligating the hemorrhoids and drying them with a hot iron. Other treatments such as applying various salves are suggested as well.[3][4] Today, "treatment [for hemorrhoids] still includes burning, strangling, and excising".[1] Also, some of the fundamental concepts of proctoscopy outlined in the Corpus are still in use.[1][2] For example, the uses of the rectal speculum, a common medical device, are discussed in the Hippocratic Corpus. [2] This constitutes the earliest recorded reference to endoscopy.[5][6]

References

  1. ^ a b c Jóhannsson 2005, p. 11
  2. ^ a b c Jani 2005, p. 24–25
  3. ^ Jóhannsson 2005, p. 12
  4. ^ Mann 2002, p. 1, 173
  5. ^ Shah 2002, p. 645
  6. ^ NCEPOD 2004, p. 4

Bibliography

  • Jani, P.G. (2005), "Management of Haemorrhoids: A Personal Experience", East and Central African Journal of Surgery 10 (2): 24–28 .
  • Jóhannsson, Helgi Örn (2005), Haemorrhoids: Aspects of Symptoms and Results after Surgery, Uppsala University, ISBN 91-554-6399-1 .
  • Mann, Charles V. (2002), Surgical Treatment of Haemorrhoids, Springer, ISBN 1852334967 .
  • NCEPOD (2004), Scoping our practice, London: National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death, ISBN 0-9539249-3-3 Check |isbn= value (help) .
  • Shah, J. (2002), "Endoscopy through the ages", BJU International (London: Academic Surgical Unit and Department of Urology, Imperial College School of Medicine, St. Mary's Hospital) 89 (7): 645–652

He will not often speak of the contents of the Rules and Regulations., doi:10.1046/j.1464-410X.2002.02726.x .

The first sentence needs rewording. Consider replacing especially considering with despite or surprisingly considering or some variation thereof. The sentence on salves also needs rewording. I had to read it several times before it made sense. Perhaps reduce the number of commas to one that can be readily expressed without the use of scientific notation? Consider reordering the sentences about the methods being used today. I would put the quote within the other sentence. The references are both sufficient in number and adequately recent given the subject matter. Be sure to spell check, as hemorrhoids is spelled incorrectly at least once. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I've attempted to fix most of your concerns. I've left the quote where it is because proctoscopy and hemorrhoid treatment are so distinct. I'll now add the paragraph to the article. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 04:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The treatment of hemorrhoids are so distinct nowadays that Hippocrates would probably turn in his grave, although having said that some of the most natural ways of treating hemorrhoids are probably still the best. "At most, hemorrhoids treatment are for chronic and critical problems, and in many cases, this means a long term solution and healing process. The best, most effective prescribed treatment for most cases of hemorrhoids remains through diet management and lifestyle changes." http://hemorrhoidsandtreatment.theazonway.com/hemorrhoids-treatment/

Fever benefits[edit]

"Give me a fever, and I can cure any illness." -- Hippocrates

It seems to me this quote might belong somewhere in the article. But, the article seems so high-quality now that I am afraid to touch it... -69.87.199.175 (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

You shouldn't ever be afraid to edit an article (see WP:BOLD); any change can be easily undone. You are right, though, in the case of a Featured Article, it's probably better to ask first. Indeed, I don't think the quote should be put in the article for a couple of reasons: one, it's not sourced... two, it probably wasn't Hippocrates who said it, but an author of the Hippocratic Corpus. Also, such quotes probably should serve their purpose in Wikiquote. Only the most famous quotes of the very quotable Corpus deserve a place in either Hippocratic Corpus or Hippocrates. "Art is long, life is short", for instance, is much more easily acceptable. I'd recommend you put the quote in Wikiquote, with a source. Thanks for the suggestion! -- Rmrfstar (talk) 07:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Honey legend[edit]

I think the beehive legend should remain mentioned because it is a particularly common legend, and its subject fits well with the information in the rest of the paragraph on various "Legends". I have re-included and commented-out the sentence until consensus is reached.-- Rmrfstar (talk) 04:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Bogus[edit]

The article is bogus and based on an illusion in it's opening. Hippocrates was not the "Father of medicine". His knowledge came about 2000 years after the more advanced societies had began the actual practice of medicine. Wikipedia needs to stop perpetuating a lie:

"Imhotep diagnosed and treated over 200 diseases, 15 diseases of the abdomen, 11 of the bladder, 10 of the rectum, 29 of the eyes, and 18 of the skin, hair, nails and tongue. Imhotep treated tuberculosis, gallstones, appendicitis, gout and arthritis. He also performed surgery and practiced some denistry. Imhotep extracted medicine from plants. He also knew the position and function of the vital organs and circulation of the blood system. The Encyclopedia Britannica says, "The evidence afforded by Egyptian and Greek texts support the view that Imhotep's reputation was very respected in early times...His prestige increased with the lapse of centuries and his temples in Greek times were the centers of medical teachings."

If this is not medicine, then I stand corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tljackson224 (talkcontribs) 17:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The article does not say that Hippocrates is the father of medicine. It says he is considered ("referred to as") the father of medicine. -- rmrfstar (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
He is the first to make medicine into a science. I am sure Greeks had practical doctors from earlier times as findings on even brain surgery have been found from the Mycenean times, but Hippocrates established the scientific method of advancing medical knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.190.63.135 (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Awwiki's addition[edit]

I just reverted the addition of the below text because it didn't come with a source:

The Hippocratic theoretical and practical tradition was never lost in Byzantium where the original Greek texts were copied and studied, although this tradition was largely lost to Western Europe after the decline of the Greek language during the Early Middle Ages. After 750 AD Arabs had Hippocratic texts translated, and adopted Hippocratic methods.[1] Hippocratic texts, both those made from Arabic translations and those made from the Greek original, were reintroduced into Western Europe beginning in the High Middle Ages, and continued to be influential on European medicine on through the Renaissance. Hippocratic clinical techniques lasted into, and to some extent were expanded, in the 19th century.

Can we (Awwiki?) find a reference for this information so that it may be included without possibly lowering the quality of the article? -- Rmrfstar (talk) 14:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Death[edit]

The article states that there are multiple theories as to his death, but does not say what they are. Can they be included in the article? MagnoliaE6 (talk) 14:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't have the book that is the reference for that statement on hand. If you can get a hold of it, feel free to propose an addition. I remember the reason that none of the accounts was included was the unreliability of all accounts. I also remember them being not particularly interesting. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 05:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hippocrate's life[edit]

Thank You for the correction. We can notice also his death in Larissa city —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.69.236.61 (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Hippocrates I.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Hippocrates I.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Suggested edit for the lede/lead[edit]

I am putting forth a suggestion here rather than making an edit because of the note to editors:

I would like to suggest a change to the first sentence of the second paragraph in the lede/lead. In my opinion, the word "However" at the beginning of this sentence, and section, is the wrong word. The word "however" normally introduces a contrast with what precedes it. Here, it does not. Also, I think generally the word "however" does not belong in the lede/lead of an article. The lede/lead is for setting out a kind of summary of the article as a whole. Contrasts and exceptions can be discussed in detail in the rest of the article.

Instead of

"However, the achievements of the writers of the Corpus, the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine, and the actions of Hippocrates himself were often commingled; thus very little is known about what Hippocrates actually thought, wrote, and did."

I suggest:

"Because the achievements of the writers of the Corpus, the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine, and the actions of Hippocrates himself were often commingled, very little is known about what Hippocrates actually thought, wrote, and did."

I think this wording expresses the proper relationship between the first half of the sentence and the second half. However, there are still problems with the sentence. It is not clear. You've got "the achievements..., the practitioners..., and the actions...." The first two go together, but the second one does not go with the other two. Now, if "the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine" were the writers of the Corpus, then, for clarity, the second phrase should be changed to an adjective clause set off by a pair of commas: "..., who were the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine,...".

If "the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine" were not the writers of the Corpus, then perhaps "the achievements of the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine" was what was meant. In that case, it should read, "the achievements of the writers of the Corpus and of the practitioners of Hippocratic medicine, and the actions...."

It would be nice if someone who knows the subject matter could decide what the correct wording should be. But I strongly recommend the "Because...., ...." sentence structure. – CorinneSD (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Leff & Leff 1956, p. 102