Jump to content

Talk:Michael Mosley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.20.185.89 (talk) at 10:55, 9 June 2024 ("qualified doctor": Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"The Story of Science"

I think that this is the presenter of the BBC Two series, "The Story of Science" - am I right? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I must be wrong. The man I was thinking of has a medical degree, and I think he was at one time a GP, and has worked as a science journalist. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:27, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can give visual confirmation that the man in the Youtube videos of The Story of Science self-identifies as the same Michael Mosley who is the subject of this article. But medical degrees are virtually ten-a-penny in the entertainment industry. Graeme Garden has one. Harry Hill has one. The Van Tulleken twins have one each!
Nuttyskin (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date

Mike mentioned his birthday as Mar 22, 1957, when discussing calorie restricted diet in BBC's Make Me Live Forever 93.89.200.51 (talk) 06:14, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If he was born in 1957, then he would have been born in Calcutta not "Kolkata", which had not yet been adopted as the international name for the city. Nuttyskin (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

His speech

It seems laboured, as though he has a problem, eg Stroke Why? This should be added. 78.151.29.201 (talk) 09:11, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you can find a reliable source,in line with our policy for biographies of living persons. His speech seems fairly normal to me. Qwfp (talk) 09:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the above IP editor vandalized the article on Mosley. Eric talk 12:03, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"qualified doctor"

The article says he got his qualification but then never practiced. And that was many years ago. In UK 'Dr' is allowed title while registered to practice. Is "qualified doctor" an accurate summary of what he's known for, and if so should it be specified what his qualification is if not a MBBS ? GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MM's Wiki page seems to be very pro Mosley even though his dietary books are on the edge of quackery?
His programme on opioid efficacy was so one-sided it probably wouldn't be broadcast under current BBC guidelines. 2A00:23C8:292A:F501:E949:838C:1E70:7C07 (talk) 09:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
His books have not been widely reviewed by medical experts. The only expert review is by Red Pen Reviews who gave it a 58% scientific accuracy. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is surely not correct? Even while this apparently allows someone to use the title "Dr.", it's not a "real" doctorate, as that would be a higher degree awarded after a doctorate in Medicine? 94.255.241.134 (talk) 06:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a tricky one. Most UK doctors study for a 5-year undergraduate degree (MBBS – Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery MBChB) and so the title 'dr' is a customary one. Some do go one to gain doctorates. While there is no hard and fast rule, most doctors seem to retain that title when they retire, and perhaps slightly less so if they leave the profession.
Would would be more interesting is if anyone can verify whether he finished his houseman years after graduating. The hint is that he didn't. 92.20.185.89 (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red Pen Reviews

This review says the book "scored weakly for scientific accuracy" [1]. This is a direct quote, not a misrepresentation. The book scored a 58% scientific accuracy which is low. Psychologist Guy (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2.98.244.239 seems to be cherry-picking only positive comments from the review whilst ignoring the fact the book scored weakly for scientific accuracy over-all (58%). If a review is to be summarized we must be fair and give a good overview. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oswald Mosley

Why is he mentioned and linked to in this article? The only reason I can see is that I can see is that Oswald had a son called Michael, but it's obviously a different Michael, unless there's some over relation that hasn't been made clear. 86.19.77.5 (talk) 10:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're not related. Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 08:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, total red herring. Different people. I actually knew Oswald's son Michael (a farmer in Millington Cheshire), and was friendly with Michael's two grandsons.
While a very distant relationship is possible, it should have no bearing on this entry., 92.20.185.89 (talk) 10:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected

Hi Daniel Case et al, I've removed pending changes and inserted semi protection here as it seems his death isn't confirmed by most reliable sources yet and we should err on the side of caution. It didn't seem like pending changes was working in such a fast moving situation but if I'm wrong, let me know.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why does Wikipedia insist on pretending that he might still be alive? The BBC have just broadcast a long tribute to him, with people who knew him well. 86.181.19.12 (talk) 09:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because we're an encyclopedia not a news outlet. Nigej (talk) 09:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought Wikipedia was supposed to "reflect reliable sources"? Perhaps you can find one that says he's still alive? 86.181.19.12 (talk) 09:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:BDP. "Anyone born within the past 115 years is covered by this policy unless a reliable source has confirmed their death." So we assume he's alive until he's confirmed dead. That's our rule. Nigej (talk) 09:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you should lock this article. Most people in the world, who have ever heard of him, now think he's dead. 86.181.19.12 (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think he's dead too. We don't need to lock the article, we just need for people to follow our rules, otherwise their changes might get reverted. Nigej (talk) 09:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be the same BBC that is styling the story as "Body found in search for presenter Michael Mosley". No doubt it will all be confirmed shortly, but until then we don't declare him definitely dead yet.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. When his death is confirmed we need to avoid specifying an exact date. It'll be some time, if ever, before the exact date will be known. Nigej (talk) 09:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed dead?

From this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kk9gvw8l0o

Quote: "A police source told BBC News the deceased had been dead "for a number of days"."

I don't want to edit the page because I'm still new to contributing! Is it still considered not reliable enough to make the official edits? Beepboop127 (talk) 09:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw on TV they are waiting for a post-mortem so it's still not officially confirmed Beepboop127 (talk) 09:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A post mortem had nothing to do with his identity. They may be awaiting formal identification from a family member i.e. his wife. 86.181.19.12 (talk) 09:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. The current page states "On 9 June 2024 a body was found in the search for Mosley with local media reporting it as his" There's no reference for this. So isn't this jumping the gun? The body has not yet been identified. Leopardstown (talk) 09:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and edited the statement on the body being found. And added the BBC reference. If there's not a consensus on this, please revert the edit. Leopardstown (talk) 09:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's been confirmed by the mayor. Guardian Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"body of TV presenter believed to have been found on Greek island, authorities say" - the "believed to be" suggests to me that this still isn't 100% confirmed, but maybe it's nearing the point at which it could be declared.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:28, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, it is with 99.99% full certainty that Mosley is dead, even though post mortem hasn't been completed. It's not like they are searching for a needle in a haystack here, the island is 65km squared in size. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 10:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of patience please editors, not least out of respect for the family. The death probably will be confirmed and announced shortly, but until then surely we can't put his death on here as a fact.Leopardstown (talk) 10:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should disappearance and death be a seperate article?

It’s been a big news story for a few days and will have an oncoming investigation into the circumstances. Would a full article be appropriate to not bloat the main page? AlienChex (talk) 10:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Almost certainly not. It'll probably turn out to be a relatively simple story, and there'll be no need to bloat this article with excessive detail. Nigej (talk) 10:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt it, his disappearance seems fairly un-notable, and I can't imagine the investigation will amount to much other than a few sentences describing the route he took / temperature conditions over the few days. Give it a few weeks for the recentism to blow over at least. Saltywalrusprkl (talk) 10:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]