Talk:Tom Perls

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	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
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Thperls (talk · contribs)

Stub starter

This article is just starting. Try to 'improve' this. References to Tom Perls are easy to find. Ryoung122 04:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expand. This needs to be expanded. 131.96.70.164 04:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed so: I tagged it for this. Extremely sexy 16:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article is too long, final paragraph must stay

Sorry, but I don't think that this individual is important enough to merit such a long article. I do not see a Nobel Prize or even membership to the National Academy of Sciences or anything like that. On the contrary, it looks like his one big paper ended up having to be retracted from Science! This article is too long. Furthermore, the fact that the paper had to be retracted was well covered by major media sources. Because there are a lot of good references documenting this retraction, it should not be removed per Wikipedia policy.Boab (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:21, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting the scientific literature

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

This person that goes by the name "Boab" insists, regarding the retraction in Science, the "problem was never really corrected, they just published in a journal that accepts just about anything. It is rare to be retracted from Science, so this needs to stay".

First of all, we went through a year's worth of work with an independent lab at Yale University to generate a corrected and valid data set. Then the analysis was performed with the new data set, in collaboration with the independent lab. Then the paper was submitted to PLoS One and it underwent an extensive review by independent geneticists and the corrected work was published.

It is not true that Plos One publishes all the papers that it receives, as Boab asserts. All papers considered by the editors to be worthy of review then go through the typical peer review process. Papers deemed to be scientifically correct and of appropriate interest to PloS One are then published. "Boab" asserts that the work was not corrected and this is blatantly false. Further I ask, does Boab have any sort of germane scientific background to make this assertion? In my opinion, Boab's assertions entirely smack of bias.

Boab further asserts that I should not be referred to as "Dr. Perls", but I am a state licensed, practicing physician.

He says I should not use the term "anti-aging quackery" because it is non-specific, but I have published several articles with that term in the title. If it is an acceptable term to the Journal of Gerontology, it is good enough for Wikipedia.

I believe volunteers should not be anonymous. This would make them much less likely to provide incorrect (biased?)and far-too casual reviews.

Thperls — Preceding undated

Request edit closure rationale: Please provide specific textual changes you'd like to see and provide references which support the changes. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 22:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]