Talk:Linus Pauling

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.Physics: Biographies High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Biography: Science and Academia / Core

	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.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.

Biology High‑importance

	Linus Pauling is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science High‑importance

	This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

California: Southern California High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Southern California task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is a selected biography on the California Portal.

Oregon High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Anti-war High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the anti-war movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Atheism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite: If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page. Quick help Project's main talk page Article layout Links to atheism-related information · List of free online resources Writing about religion · Article development Citing sources · Verifying sources · About original research Assume good faith · Be civil Recent activity Core articles the "Atheism" article Articles recently added to Category:Atheism To do edit history watch purge Join WikiProject atheism and be bold. Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members. Help with articles. See this month's adopt-an-article. Help out with this to-do list. Be consistent Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles). Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box) Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it. Maintenance, etc. Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references). Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process). Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly. Always write for an encyclopedia. Articles to improve Agnosticism Create Articles on notable atheists Expand an atheism stub Immediate attention State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments. False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes. Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Alternative Views High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemistry Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biophysics (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biophysics, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Quasicrystals

I was wondering if there should be something about his opposition towards Dan Shechtman's findings about quasicrystals. Any thoughts? NeutralWikipedia 15:58, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps this could be mentioned near the end of a section on his crystallography work. Except that the article now seems to have no section with all his contributions to crystallography. Some are mentioned briefly in sections on the chemical bond and biological molecules. Others such as Pauling's rules for ionic crystal structures are absent from this article.

So I would propose that we include a section on crystallography putting all his work on crystals together. This would then be a natural place to could include a mention of his ideas on (or against) quasicrystals. We will of course need sources for this. Dirac66 (talk) 19:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree; his behavior with regard to quasicrystals was most unbecoming. He started out by claiming that a simple twin would produce the same results. He ended up by suggesting that thousands of twins would explain them! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.156.175 (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

For those who might want to work on this, more on the quasicrystals story is available in a four-post series published on the Pauling Blog. Petersec (talk) 22:39, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes - this page is not balanced - His great success went to his head. His conflict with Robinson ended up with research data destroyed (part of the data didn't support vitamin C claims) - the story has been ghosted - destroying research data is a crime against humanity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.243.106.82 (talk) 22:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Criticism

Pauling was undoubtedly a very important scientist, however he did make some pretty bad mistakes too that due to his fame hindered science. Three such events come to mind, there might be others:

• The wrong structure proposed for the DNA (triple helix with phosphates pointing inwards)
• The unwillingness to accept existence of quasi-crystals
• The wrong structure proposed for phosphomolybdic acid, what is now called the Keggin structure. This is important as it was the first polyoxometalate to be identified as well as the first one to have its structure solved.

In light of this, shouldn't there be a criticism section in this article? 185.46.77.38 (talk) 15:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Vitamin C therapy being used with connection to the current virus. It seems to me that Pauling deserves at least some nod, since he promoted Vitamin C as antiviral support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsruli (talk • contribs) 23:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I'd add that he also refused to accept the now proven idea of quasi-crystals, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman#Work_on_quasicrystals 90.78.97.142 (talk) 11:46, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• MMBBPN .jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Vitamin C Was Szent-Georgi.

Google gives the accidental and quite incorrect impression that Pauling's Chemistry Nobel involved Vitamin C. Pauling became a vitamin C crank toward the end of his life, but his Nobel in chemistry has nothing to do with this rather sad fact. He studied at Goettingen in the 1930s, made the rather obvious observation that the quantum mechanics well known there would have an impact on chemistry, and then exploited the apercu with great intelligence and energy once he returned to the United States. That's what his Nobel is all about.

His Peace Prize may be thought of as related: his warning of the dangers of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons was based on his scientific appreciation of the damage done by radioactive pollution at the cellular level.

My friend the late Albert Szent-Györgyi won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1937 and this is commonly said to be "for vitamin C." That's largely true, and anybody interested can start with the perfectly sound Wiki entry on him at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Szent-Gy%C3%B6rgyi.

The entry states "he is credited with," and he was the first to say, at least in private, that this "credited with" is not unanimous. On the other hand, I don't think anyone doubts the Nobel-quality of his overall work.

In any subsequent work on this Pauling entry, I wonder if the author or editors might make a modest reference to the errors of public opinion around vitamin C and the people responsible for its identification, isolation, and genuine value to health?

The single brief paragraph on Pauling's later days as a crank is elegant and restrained, and I think it can stand as it is. In his later years he promoted nuclear disarmament, as well as orthomolecular medicine, megavitamin therapy,[11] and dietary supplements. None of the latter have gained much acceptance in the mainstream scientific community.[5][12] My Grammarly now tells me it wants a comma after "years," which anybody who agrees with Grammarly is welcome to insert.

David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Added the comma, thanks for noticing. You could have done that yourself, I think the page is not protected.

I could not find any other suggestions for improving the article (which is this page's sole purpose, BTW). --Hob Gadling (talk) 17:25, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Commemorations section

Linus Van Pelt was named for Linus Pauling. Drsruli (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)