Talk:Illnesses of Ariel Sharon

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Ariel Sharon.

Old merge tag

Note: I removed the merge tag so as to not confuse our readers and as per discussions here; however, in light of discussion with Redux and Tomer, I decided to place it here, for now. Please do not reintroduce it into the article without discussion. El_C 03:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a matter of housekeeping, I have removed the merge tag that was placed here when it was taken off the article page (almost 11 months ago), because the merge tag has long since been retored to the article. I also moved the above note, concerning the merge tag on this talk page, below the TOC. 6SJ7 23:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cholesterol

All accounts that I've read state that Sharon's cholesterol was normal.66.214.230.155 00:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

article dedicated to his/her illnesses?

Who else deserves a dubious honor to have an encyclopedia article dedicated to his/her illnesses? ←Humus sapiens ←ну? 12:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the run-up to the death of Yasser Arafat, we had an article dedicated to his illness. In so doing we were able to protect his main page from the vandalism that plagued it, and were able to edit away, adding pertinent information as it occoured --Irishpunktom\^talk 12:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick deletion

The essence of this article can and is part of the Ariel Sharon and Kadima articles. Sharon "illnesses" are not some sort of seperate entity from Sharon the person. The discussion about Sharon weight is simply very bizarrre. So what does it have to do with politics? Furthermore, at no point did the Sharon article reach the lengths that would have required a spin-off article. Seems this article is just here to quote who is praying for Sharon to either live or die, and that is not a good justification for a Wikipedia article. IZAK 05:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IZAK, there is already a discussion of this going on at Talk:Ariel Sharon - I don't think a CSD tag is warranted, for reasons being discussed over there. GabrielF 05:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't delete it...it's all over the news...but I would make it a protected redirect. The information belongs in the Ariel Sharon article. Tom e r ^talk 05:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I will redirect it. IZAK 06:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And now someone has brought it back. IZAK 06:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well, we're having a discussion about that on the talk page of the Ariel Sharon article, and views are currently split. El_C 06:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bad title

Hey, I think it's OK (even welcome, considering the size of Ariel Sharon main article) to have this information on a separate page. However, I believe that the title is not very good. I propose to change it to Health condition of Ariel Sharon. However, I think we should not merge it, as the article would get to big (yeah, I have issues, I just hate big articles). algumacoisaqq 12:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weight

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051227/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_sharon has figures, which it claims are official ones. Morwen - Talk 12:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

260 lbs. is morbidly obese? How short is he?! Carolynparrishfan 18:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Illness in heads of state

This page should exist, having an important bearing on current events, but at a point it will need to be condensed, merged with Ariel Sharon and deleted. See an interesting article by Lord David Owen on the subject[1]. JFW | T@lk 12:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In (non-committal) theory, I agree with this position. So long as it remains a top news story, it should stay. I am removing the merge tag for now (no need to subject our readers to needless tags). I will personally restore it once the illness story isn't making these top headlines. El_C 12:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit of mine

Recently, I edited this article with the sole purpose of including the tag linking to the proposed merge of this article with the Ariel Sharon article. To my knowledge, all I did was click the "edit this page" button and add the appropriate template. To my surprise, GabrielF contacted me on my talk page, wondering why I had "reverted the 'International Reaction' section to a previous version". I'd like to say that I have no idea whatsoever of how that happened. I did not intend to revert anything, and, as far as I can remember, I took no steps to do it (such as clicking the oldedit link in the history page).
I'm thinking that maybe it was one of those glitches that come and go every now and then in the software. But I cannot rule out the possibility that maybe I was distracted somehow. In any event, I apologize to the editors for the inconvenience caused. Regards, Redux 13:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advise

Just let this run some extra days. gidonb 14:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ventilator, not respirator

For those who add updates, please refer to the device assisting with Sharon's breathing as a ventilator, not a respirator. I stumbled upon the page for 'respirator' tonight and it is one of those pages the New York Times could point to as 'incorrect information.' A respirator is what laypersons call a 'gas mask,' a device worn to prevent inhalation of harmful gases, dusts, and/or fumes in atmosphere. As an RN, I've referred to what you'd call a 'breathing machine' as a ventilator for my entire career, and as an occupational safety RN I've spent years fitting respirators to people. If this is an encyclopedia, let's use the correct definitions. Thanks. - ddlamb 08:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. Everybody, please be mindful of the medical terms when referring to mr. Sharon's treatment. We don't want the NYT on our case, again. Regards, Redux 23:04, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop saying duely. The word is "duly". Unless you mean a dually. :-D Tom e r ^talk 11:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, either a typo or plain distraction... Someone must be tampering with my medication now ;). In case anyone wonders where I butchered the English language, that was in the edit summary for my previous comment in this thread. Redux 12:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was me...I took some of your pills when I was looking for mine.

Tom e r ^talk 14:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hands...shaking...mouth...dry. Maybe that blue alligator sitting on the couch can help me out. Rredduxx 23:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah the marvel of levity. :-) Tom e r ^talk 03:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we gotta shape up. Redux 16:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge discussion

For anyone who's paying attention here but hasn't made it over to the primary discussion about this, please see Talk:Ariel Sharon#Merge article. Tom e r ^talk 11:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Age is an illness?

The article lists age as one of Sharon's illnesses. This is ridiculous. I agree with an earlier post, this should be renamed 'Health Conditions of Ariel Sharon.' Jjjoseph 23:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated tags

I removed the {{flux}} tag since nothing of any significance has been changed here in about two months and the link to the three-month-old Wikinews story. Angr (talk • contribs) 08:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Age

I have reworked the section on his age. It originally stated:

Sharon's age is a significant risk factor; he was born on February 27, 1928, and turned 77 almost a year before the first stroke. He recently turned 78 years old (after the second stroke).

Saying he turned 77 almost a year before the first stroke is silly. A year after he turned 77 he will be 78. Therefore it is more appropriate to talk about him being shy/close to 78 not almost a year after he turned 77. Alternatively, we could say he turned 77 about 9 months before the first stroke. Either way, we shouldn't talk about a year. It is also unnecessary to say he turned 78 years old recently. Firstly, this would require update fairly soon. Perhaps in a month or two, it will be a while since he turned 78 so we can no longer say he recently turned 78. More importantly, we have given the the birthdate and so it will be easier for people to just work out the age. If you really feel the need to include his age, then just mention the age. Something like:

Sharon's age is a significant risk factor; he was born on February 27, 1928, and so it currently 78 yeard old. He was about 3 months shy of his 78th birthday when the first stroke occured.

Importantly, don't mention whether he recently turned 78 or not. It is unnecessary as people can work it out for themselves based on the current date. Nil Einne 04:08, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major shortening proposed

Although there is a merge tag on this article (pointing to Talk:Ariel Sharon for the discussion), there actually has been no discussion of a merger at either place since early July (unless I missed something.) With the first anniversary of these events approaching, and with Sharon officially out of office for what has now been a significant period, I think it is time for a decision. Since nobody seems to want to talk about it at present, I am proposing an interim step: The removal of the entire "Reaction" section of the article. Arguably, it was interesting at the time (leaving aside the school of thought that Wikipedia should not contain compilations of recent news reports anyway.) However, from the vantage point of today, the question should be whether any of this information is of lasting historical interest, and I don't think it is. Most of the reactions are pretty much what you would expect. I do think that the statements by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Pat Robertson should be in the articles on those individuals if they are not already, as those comments really reflect on the persons making them and not on the person they are made about. Someone could also write a very brief summary about the reactions and place it in the Ariel Sharon article, where I think there is already a section about views of Sharon from various quarters. I don't think there is a valid distinction between remarks made about him when he was in office and remarks made about him after he became ill; it all belongs in the main article about him. Therefore, I am going to remove this section unless there are objections within the next 48 hours. 6SJ7 22:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I gave it a few more weeks than I had planned to. 6SJ7 20:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PVS and life support

In the UK, if you're in a persistant vegetative state they turn off your life support. I'm guessing that isn't the done thing in Israel - a few words about that in the article from one who knows would be very welcome. Thanks! — ciphergoth 08:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

AIDS

Is it true he has AIDS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.116.9.121 (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no, maybe arafat had Vypolzen2 (talk) 18:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

I have had a go at a merger with the Ariel Sharon article. Rothorpe (talk) 13:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]