Talk:List of medical eponyms with Nazi associations

Title
Unrelated to the deletion debate, is it correct to have the words in the title starting with uppercase?--Mjpresson (talk) 02:49, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It is not. I dislike the title of the article entirely, though.  I'm waiting for the AfD to close and/or inspiration to strike me before I propose anything, since I have nothing better to offer at the moment. Jclemens (talk) 07:08, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

List?
Is a list really the best way to present this information? There are perhaps 30ish entries, but in trying to flesh out a list, I'm seeing a lot more information that could be presented... though perhaps not in tabular formation. Opinions welcome. Jclemens (talk) 01:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * At first glance, my opinion is that a list makes sense. If we start adding a bunch of information about each condition, we'll end up with a long and difficult-to-read article.  Perhaps any detailed information that you find (i.e. about the history of the condition, why it was named after that person, how it came to be renamed to something more generic, etc.) could be added to the article on the disease/condition.  Snotty Wong   confess 23:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I played around with reformatting the table a bit and put it at User:Snottywong/sandbox. Think it's better/worse, or any comments?  Feel free to modify it.  Snotty Wong   gossip 16:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that's MUCH better--I was thinking along those lines. The column on discouragement efforts was too sparsely populated, and if we're going to move away from block quotes, the "citation" column really does need to move inline. Jclemens (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Improvements
Bravo on the great job rescuing this article!--Mjpresson (talk) 23:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Up for DYK...
TDYK Jclemens (talk) 15:59, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's been approved, and should be up on the main page in 29 hours. Jclemens (talk) 01:22, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Guilty? Not Guilty? Possibly Guilty? Looks like there should be several lists!
The information provided in the entry shows that some of the individual researchers who names are attached to various eponyms were convicted of war crimes or committed suicide to avoid prosecution, but that in the case of some of the others the Israeli (?) group investigating this issue admits that there is no proof that these researchers participated in criminal research. Without conclusive proof of guilt an objective student of history must wonder if individuals in the latter category are being persecuted for being Germanic.

Do we take someone's name off something they discovered because they might have been contact with others who were using concentration came inmates in experiments, or because they did research after 1945 when the Nazi research system had been destroyed?

On a broader and fully objective level what research is being done to indentify medical researchers of other nationalities whose fame may be based on discoveries made through experimentation on unwilling or uninformed human subjects? One example of this type of research outside the context of Nazi Germany would be the American research project that tracked the course of untreated syphilis on a group of African-American men without their knowledge or consent from the mid-1930s onward.

What has the research group found regarding the use of prisoners for medical research in the Soviet Union and early Showa Japan (1925-1945)?

Have there been any reports of prisoner populations being exploited for medical research purposes in the People's Republic of China or the People's Democratic Republic of Korea?

Hopefully the group that is investigating this issue as it relates medical research by Germans during the Third Reich era will thoroughly investigate this subject as it applies to other nations and political systems as well. (71.22.47.232 (talk) 11:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC))
 * Wikipedia does not assess guilt or innocence; it merely reports what reliable secondary sources are saying about a topic. If you're concerned that other lists might have enough such sources to be created, yet are not, then feel free to go start one. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Nice work
Overall looks reasonably good now, and fairly stated. FT2 (Talk 14:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Excessive use of quotations?
I see this article was re-written under time pressure at AfD, but practically every line in the table is associated with a full quote, which seems excessive; see Quote farm Tijfo098 (talk) 19:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Eventually, I expect to be rewriting it. Right now, I'm intentionally erring on the side of over-quotation because of the sensitive and nuanced nature of the accusations against these gentlemen.  BLP doesn't apply, but due caution does.  If you'd like to help rewrite any particular quote into a good, accurate paraphrase, feel absolutely free to do so. Jclemens (talk) 19:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Asperger Debate
There is some debate as to whether Hans Asperger was connected to the Nazi party or not. I think we should at least mention it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDracologist (talk • contribs) 03:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * We have an RS saying he was. Is there another RS saying he was not? Jclemens (talk) 02:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Would this count? TheDracologist (talk) 23:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)