Talk:Charles Whitman

Author's notice

I copied the following from the edit summary:

20:53, 17 June 2010 John Calvin Moore (Talk | contribs) (28,520 bytes) (I wrote 90% of the Wikipedia article and posted the photos and docs there, this will be done with the same. I made a major overhaul of the WP article here, licensing should be here for Citizen)

--Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello Peter and everybody - a lot said here is true. I did apparently nominate the article premature. I also find the format here excellent, with some difficulty of losing the WP ways of doing things. Let's consider this newbiw mistakes. Also, the email change took me several days to find the link to change my email address, buried in a google folder. Also, I would appreciate some help on what is the best source for formatting. Thanks! John Calvin Moore 21:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Nomination mistake?

I'm not sure if John meant to nominate the article for approval, or if he doesn't totally understand the metadata and it was a mistake. If it was intended, then it will need other Editors as he has written the majority of the article. Also, the metadata will need updating to include a specific version, rather than just the URL of the article itself. --Chris Key 12:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

When I fixed the Metadata, I also noticed the missing permanent link, but since this will need Constable interaction, I simply left it as it is. --Peter Schmitt 13:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

In many ways, this is a very historically significant article. While I'm quite aware of the Bath incident, it is the first spree killing of which many Americans are aware. As such, it will be even more valuable tied to other articles on mass murder, some of which certainly need to be written.

It's not uncommon for people to bring material from WP and put it up for immediate Approval, but that rarely if ever happens, the simplest reason being that new Citizens may not be aware of formatting conventions here, and of the titles of relevant existing articles that should be wikilinked back and forth. If nothing else, even if one is an Editor, one cannot nominate, without other Editors, an article to which one contributed substantially.

While we certainly don't demand that everything written by an expert be sourced, some of the statements here do seem speculative and should either be made more specific or sourced. As a CZ: History Workgroup Editor, I'd say this is a status 2 (developing) article. I'd actively like to work with it, which will mean that three Editors will have to approve -- that should not be a problem. Coincidentally, I've been doing some work in neurology and oncology, and this was an impetus to start the glioblastoma article, to which I'll be adding. Howard C. Berkowitz 14:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Chris, yes it was a mistake. When the form popped up, I thought it was a pre-requisite. Now I know it is not.

Thanks Peter, sorry for your issue with the Metadata link, that will not be an issue in the future with other articles from me.

Howard, your question to me on your page allowed me to find this page. Thank you! You are right, the tower incident is significantly historical. My findings however, do not classify Whitman as a "Spree Killer", and please bear with me, I will make that case in the final rendering of the article. Yes, he killed his wife and mother in different locations, but those murders were separate from the motivations of the tower shootings, we can discuss that together if you like. John Calvin Moore 21:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

When I speak of spree killing, I was thinking only of the tower part. I don't want to say that the killing of his wife and mother are insignificant, but my understanding of "spree" is multiple victims within a short period of time, often but not necessarily at the same location. Several recent college incidents, where the killer moved in or among buildings, still are sprees in that the multiple killings were separated by only a brief period of time.

I'll have to hunt for references, but this was significant not just in terms of police response, but of a lack of medical capability -- that which was called an emergency room really wasn't one by modern standards, certainly with no existing plan to deal with a multiple casualty incident. From the police standpoint, this was more straightforward than a moving "active shooter" such as Columbine, but, in the sixties, only the military really would have had an idea how to take out a sniper. My understanding is that the Whitman incident was one of the motivators for the formation of SWAT teams. Howard C. Berkowitz 21:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Autopsy problems section

From the article: ==Autopsy Problems==

At the Cook Funeral Home on August 2, 1966, an autopsy was performed as requested in Whitman's suicide note and approved by Whitman's father, Charles Adolf Whitman, and performed by Dr. Chenar, who found a brain tumor and initially reported as an astrocytoma brain tumor in the Autopsy Protocol Report, although results from the subsequent Governor's report investigation doctor's revealed the tumor was a grade 4 Glioblastoma Multiforme that conceivably could have been a factor in Whitman's actions.

Although Whitman had been prescribed drugs, and Whitman had a vial containing dextroamphetamine on his body after his death, the autopsy could not establish if he had consumed any drugs prior to the shooting. Whitman's bodily fluids had been removed and his body embalmed prior to the autopsy, so there was no urine to test for the amphetamines. However, it was revealed during the autopsy that Whitman had a Glioblastoma tumor in the hypothalamus region of his brain. Some have theorized that this may have been pressed against the nearby amygdala, which can have an effect on fight/flight responses. This has led some neurologists to speculate that his medical condition was in some way responsible for the attacks, as well as his personal and social frames of reference.

A few clarifications: a glioblastoma (or glioblastoma multiforme) is a grade IV astrocytoma, by the WHO classification. It also may be reported as a grade IV glioma. The text suggests there is some conflict in the report, but each of the mention of a tumor refers to the same histopathological diagnosis.

"Body fluids" is adequate; amphetamine testing can be done on blood as well.

I think a bit more clarification of the speculation about the hypothalamic tumor pressing on the amygdala is needed. The reference is a bit confusing: as a PhD, Rhawn Joseph could not be a neurologist. What neurologists are doing the speculation?

Diagnoses and interpretation in general

From the lede, after updating wikilinks, "By today's standards, his personality would have been deemed narcissistic with borderline personality features NOS, (not otherwise specified)." I believe a specific diagnosis, especially in a mixed DSM category, needs sourcing, or at least a substantial analysis. Howard C. Berkowitz 18:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Glioblastoma

Unfortunately, the symptoms described are too nonspecific, in my opinion, even to suggest a diagnosis. In the 1960s, the only certain diagnosis was microscopic examination at surgery or autopsy. Today, MRI would give a good suggestion, but the histopathological diagnosis remains the only sure thing.

Why try to make an issue of the earlier symptoms when there is clear autopsy evidence of a tumor? Now, it is worth backtracking on dates, and it also would be informative to know if there was any assessment of the progression of the growth. While I'd want to look for figures in the 1960s, I'd suspect that median survival for an untreated glioblastoma was under 4 months. That fairly rules out any of the symptoms during the Marine service being due to it -- he would have died soon afterwards. Recent seizure activity, however, is potentially relevant. There does need to be some sourcing on why the UofT is believed to have such records. Howard C. Berkowitz 23:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing "to Approve" notice

I am removing the Editorial to Approve stuff -- there is no date, and, as a complete newcomer to CZ, I think he is simply not at home with the Metadata process. Hayford Peirce 16:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Document images

I'd like to hear from others on this, but I hesitate to put up document images rather than bibliographic citations to the documents contained in them. There's nothing wrong with putting the image in a Gallery subpage, but I'm not sure what the image adds to the main article. Howard C. Berkowitz 22:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Infobox and other Editor comments

I'll ask for other comments, but, in general, we don't make extensive use of infoboxes other than for specialized things such as chemicals. Think of it as a look-and-feel difference from WP.

Charles Joseph Whitman
Other names	Charlie
Born	24th June 1941 Lake Worth, Florida
Died	1st August 1966 University of Texas Tower - Austin, Texas
Occupation	Student
Religion	Roman Catholic turned agnostic
Notable relations	Kathleen Whitman
University of Texas Sniper

Again, I urge to write narratives about the content of documents and give a bibliographic citation, rather than insert the scanned images. If there's something specific in the image (i.e., beyond the text), it could be graphically emphasized or put in a Gallery subpage.

As far as diagnoses and implications, these really need support and not speculation. The brain tumor symptoms are not very specific, and, if he had had a glioblastoma in the Marines, he would have been dead in months.

The media and YouTube comes across as a bit argumentative -- perhaps you could paraphrase? Howard C. Berkowitz 18:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)