Talk:Robert Koch: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 06:14, 10 December 2017

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 24, 2004.

Template:Vital article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia Start‑class

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Microbiology Start‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology 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.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Start‑class High‑importance

	Biology portal Robert Koch is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Start‑class High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. Once references have been added, remove the `\|unref=` from this template.

Medicine Start‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science Start‑class Mid‑importance

	History of science portal 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.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physiology Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology 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.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the field of physiology.

Untitled

Some say his "ineffective" TB "cure" was more lethal than the disease.Template:Deadline 142.177.126.57 01:22, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"Some" are remarkably ignorant, and remarkably willing to distort history and science to their own peculiar ends. Some others apparently have yet to meet a conspiracy theory they didn't like. - Nunh-huh 01:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The German Wiki-page seems to confirm that Koch's tuberkulin was not only ineffective in healing the sick but was even harmful. It led to a scandal and as a result future drugs had to be more thoroughly tested before being used on humans. --139.18.240.41 (talk) 15:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Translation needed

The German-language page is much more comprehensive. LeadSongDog 19:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree, the German page needs to be translated. Aberjan (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Similar name

I realise that there is a link to other people with the same surname, but it might be useful to state explicitly that Walter Karl Koch, rather than Robert Koch was responsible for naming Koch's triangle. After all, they were both German, both involved in medicine - it might avoid confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.45.121 (talk) 20:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vibrio cholerae

In this edit's comment a question was asked that needs a response. The distinction amongst the organisms is that not all Vibrio are V. cholerae. Is there something in the article that makes this unclear? User:LeadSongDog come howl 04:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.6.181.193 (talk) 05:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Monument out of whack

The editing of the final section is out of order -- talking about the monument delay before the reason for it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.230.117.5 (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discovered the cause of cholera?

Did he realy discover V. cholera? see http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/snow/firstdiscoveredcholera.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Healkids (talk • contribs) 04:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

gopal gondhia

he was a great man — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.7.18 (talk) 10:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cholera / Filippo Pacini

Shouldnt there be a bit at the beginning and/or in the section about Cholera about Filippo Pacini, the Italian who was actually the first person to isolate the cholera bacilus? I thik there should be... ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(^Ταλκ) 18:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Techniques

Maybe highlight more his use of agar as a growth medium and his invention of bacterial stains? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GhostInTheMachine (talk • contribs) 18:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

African Slave Subjects

That seems like an odd "fact" to include in the opening paragraph, and then not have any follow-up in the remainder of the article. Is this simply a case of article vandalism? Or can this be backed up with sources? --184.64.110.38 (talk) 06:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. The citation is not clear and it sounds like bullshit. To make an accusation like this, which what this statement amounts to, you need to back it up.

experimenting on humans

Which citation contains the information that Koch experimented on humans? It is not clear, and an assertion like this needs to be CRYSTAL CLEAR as to where this information comes from. Otherwise it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.138.90.156 (talk) 06:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 That seems like an odd "fact" to include in the opening paragraph, and then not have any follow-up in the remainder of the article. Is this simply a case of article vandalism? Or can this be backed up with sources? --[[Special:Contributions/184.64.110.38|184.64.110.38]] ([[User talk:184.64.110.38|talk]]) 06:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
+I completely agree. The citation is not clear and it sounds like bullshit. To make an accusation like this, which what this statement amounts to, you need to back it up.
 == experimenting on humans ==