User talk:Alteripse/archive3

abortion
Hi alteripse - after reading all the commentary, you will note that I ended up going with a "death" phrasing at abortion and eliminating the political controversy talk, since the concensus seemed to be that it belonged elsewhere. This keeps getting edited, so it is hard to know how to phrase it.

Negative connotation at CAH
Hey there, Alteripse! Compliments on your amazingly extensive additions to CAH -- your work is truly impressive. However, I noticed some potentially negative connotation in one of your latest additions:


 * However, surgery for severely virilized XX infants is often performed and has become a subject of debate in the last decade. (my emphasis)

Considering the strong feelings over CAH and its potential for "correction" (and considering that some feel that CAH isn't something to be corrected), I'd hesitate to use the phrase "severely virilized" because of its negative connotation. Maybe "extensively virilized" (or something of the sort) may be better? Naturally, severely may fit the bill; you're the authoritative one here, of course. I just figured I'd bring it to your attention ;-) --Diberri | Talk 05:02, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

I moved this question and a reply to talk:congenital adrenal hyperplasia. See you there.Alteripse 11:12, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please Consult About Medical Facts
¿Are you a member of Doctors Opposing Circumcision? Even if you are not a member of Doctors Opposing Circumcision, I would like to occasionally, consult with you about the medical facts of articles. Intactivists always try to get the facts write --  unlike the evil circumcisiophiliacs who care nothing for the truth.

¡Thanks!

&#364;alabio 03:13, 2004 Aug 18 (UTC)


 * I hope you're not trying to draw Dr Alteripse into politics and controversy here. We need him too much for the real issues. JFW | T@lk

Redirects and capitalization
Hi; you should look at Redirect if you haven't already done so. Not only is redirecting from an alternative capitalization a good idea in most cases (it prevents accidental duplication of articles and may help in searches; the fact that you started the article capitalized shows at least someone might link to it by that title), but it is also best to redirect rather than delete, generally speaking. You did a cut-and-paste move (usually a bad thing); and while you were the only contributor to the article and therefore only your edits would have been deleted, saving page histories is a good thing in most cases (due to the GFDL and other reasons). Most people like to keep their contributions (sometimes even the erroneous ones), so I'm a bit confused; but I'm sorry if this has upset you. Did my explanation help at all? -- Hadal 03:33, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No big deal either way. It just seems more consistent to delete since we don't routinely suggest creating such an "all-caps" redirect for every article on purpose. Alteripse 03:49, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

¡We Need A Doctor!
At David Peter Reimer, those with a special interest in circumcision try to change the reasons for circumcising Bruce. To get you up to speed, this is a quick summery:


 * Months ago, we (you, I, others) determined that the stated reason Max Cham and Jean Huot claimed (phimosis) was impossible (or universal and benign) because the præpuce and glans are fused and the præputial opening is too small in infancy. Gairdner  1948 Whither the foreskin?


 * We determined that the most probable true diagnosis was deliberate iatrogenic balanitis from deliberate forced retraction for cleaning leading to deliberate iatrogenic balanitis deliberately misdiagnosed as phimosis in order to get the circumcision-fee. We detetmined this because tens of millions of other babies in North America had deliberate iatrogenic balanitis from forced retraction for cleaning leading to deliberate iatrogenic balanitis deliberately misdiagnosed as phimosis in order to get the circumcision-fee in the twentieth century.  It is just the most probable cause.


 * Yesterday, User:Jakew removed all of the information about this being a deliberate misdiagnosis of deliberate iatrogenic balanitis from deliberate forced retraction for cleaning leading to deliberate iatrogenic balanitis deliberately misdiagnosed as phimosis in order to get the circumcision-fee. and made it look like Max Cham and Huot are nice fellows. This just so happens to suite the special interest in universal circumcision this individual has.

¿Could you please help? ¿Could you write what you believe the true probable diagnosis is and why? Could you help rewrite the section of the article about diagnosis?

¡Thanks! &#364;alabio 16:50, 2004 Oct 23 (UTC)

Syndrome X
There are two Syndromes X: cardiac and metabolic. I think cardiac syndrome X is actually very similar to Prinzmetal angina. The "metabolic" syndrome X is now being called mainly metabolic syndrome, probably to avoid confusion with the cardiac Syndrome X.

Thanks for reviewing MODY. It needed some help; I used a review in Clinical Medicine from Mar/Apr this year but I decided not to copy out the list of mutated genes to avoid copyvio scares :-) JFW | T@lk  12:54, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Phimosis
Dear Alteripse: I think you have the wrong person. The only change to the article that I made was to insert a link in the citations that someone else had overlooked.Robert Blair 06:36, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. I don't think I addressed anything to you, did I? alteripse 12:47, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Many thanks
Hi. Thanks for your best wishes. I am awe-struck at your output, I have quite a way to go before I can match that. The problem is that the more pages I write, the bigger is the list of links to them which have to be written. I suppose I ought to go back to the start of my list and systematically write pages for the links in them, before starting anything totally new. I have been very busy of late in my day-job with a couple of big editing and writing projects, but once I am clear of them and have more time --- I wish! Apwoolrich 14:30, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Latin phrases
You made a few improvements to List of Latin proverbs while I was in the process of moving it to Wikiquote. I think your changes were lost - I apologize. You may want to look through Latin proverbs to be sure. – Quadell (talk) (help)  19:56, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

I was working on list of Latin phrases and it appears ok. No harm no foul. alteripse 20:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Regarding sex assigment
You had the nerve to claim on my talk page that my last edit on the talk page of the article were "insulting" and wanted to know whether we could resolve the dispute. Well, obviously not, since you seem to regard the mentioning of facts you don't like as insults, and obviously, without facts we cannot resolve the dispute. Anyway, since I do not know whether you would read the answer on my talk page, I copied it here, too.
 * Are you joking? You were the one who reverted to a POV-pushing version and ranted and insulted me for trying to improve "your" article. And obviously my edits shows much more "intellectual support" for what I wrote than your, too. So maybe you ought to try and to better the next time - like checking facts and not insulting people, for example. However, if you consider my last comment on the talk page as "primary insulting", then obviously there is no basis whatever for a meaningful debate between us, and that clearly shows that you have neither the capacity not the willingness to resolve the problem. Well, so be it. -- AlexR 15:45, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

66.20.28.21's case
The Arbitration Committee has ruled on the case of 66.20.28.21. You may be interested in seeing the final decision of the case. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 16:38, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)

Adminship
Hello, I have nominated you for adminship. If interested, please accept at Requests for adminship/Alteripse. Taco Deposit | Talk-o Deposit 19:18, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I'm in the Iowa City area and enjoying it.  Don't forget to accept your nom. Taco Deposit | Talk-o Deposit 02:02, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

Glucokinase article

 * 1) On the site from where I search for the PDB, it's a bit hard to distinguish 'l' from '1' because of the font they use. When my program couldn't find 1GLK, I incorrectly assumed it was 1G1K. I thought it looked weird, but figured maybe it was a dimer or one was the catalytic site while the other was the regulation -- I'm not really that familiar with that enzyme. Thanks for catching that and it's fixed now
 * 2) I apologize for removing the empty headers, especially since it messed things up. I wasn't aware you were still working on them.
 * 3) In the original formula, there were '=', so I figured someone forgot to push shift, since that's how you get the '+' sign (at least, on many US keyboards). It was an oversight on my part, I'm not contesting the validity.

Re: our "friend", it's really sad that these types of things seem to leak in everywhere. If I wanted those kinds of problems, I'd go edit Creationism or something like that. Sigh... --jag123 05:35, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I see you've added the '=' again. Is this a mistake or really a notation which I've never seen before? --jag123 03:09, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) It is meant to be equiv to 2- (the opposite of ++). I adopted the equation directly from a review article by Maria Cardenas, who "wrote the book" on the liver form of GK. Her form of the equation is R-CH2OH + MgATP2- arrow R-CH2O-PO32- + MgADP- + H+

I thought my adaptation was a little clearer but do you think we should change back to 2- or use her whole equation? alteripse 03:26, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, alteripse, thanks for replying on RfA. I hope you didn't think I was taking a poke. I've declined being nominated for adminship a couple of times, and there's always a kind of low-level debate going on in my head about whether or not to accept next time, so I'm interested in how others think. I get to take my pick, huh? ;-) OK, they're all good answers, though they wouldn't all be valid for me. I guess I worry more about wiki addiction than you do (or just have a worse case of it than you do), so adminship getting me to "start doing additional community activities" is on the minus, not the plus, debating team in my head. It's pretty much that team's star rhetorician, even. Anyway, I'm sure you'll make a good, well-balanced admin, you've been doing really good work around the place. And the vote's looking pretty good, isn't it! Best wishes, Bishonen | Talk 07:16, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:38, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Second on the list - many thanks for the footnoting, and the help on my *own* q on the ref desk! Little name, big fan --allie 23:50, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, our paths just crossed ~ the mysterious yet elusive footnote technique. Yes, I know...it's as easy as lsu9twye nfiniuty ljwyt. But do you have it written down somewhere, perhaps?? For the geekiest nerd who exists on planet Wikipedia? Many thanks. --allie 01:46, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Slow? hahaha That's a laugh! You inserted footnotes in the Soup article. Now, don't hate me- because I deleted them in a later revision. But here's the thing - they keep popping up whenever I try to use your tech. again. It's two { then fn1 and then two } .... and then you went in to fix the formatting when I ran into problems. So...I don't really know how to do it properly. Then, when I tried to do it in another article? The fn from Soup appeared in the next article. Confused? So am I. --allie 09:35, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Duh! It wasn't you who taught me the footnote technique - it was Alterego! Terribly sorry for the confusion. Have I mentioned congratulations yet today? Best regards, --allie 17:31, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS! I only found out today. We should work together more. Any suggestions? JFW | T@lk  00:34, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

66.20.28.21
You offered, at Talk:Marietta, Georgia, to protect the page. You also cite the arbitration, which I am familiar with. Is there nothing else, nothing more forceful or effective, that was envisioned by that ruling? User:VirtuousO has just reverted to the 66.20.28.21 edit of Marietta, Georgia and Phil Gingrey, two pages on which I have been reverting this same edit for some time now. VirtuousO also inexplicably reverted two other pages, Tenzin Gyatso and Syngman Rhee, or at least it would be inexplicable but for the obvious fact that 66.20.28.21 is engaging in specific retribution against me. (Check the user contributions, and then look at the histories of those pages. The Syngman Rhee edit was pointless disruption in the first place, and VirtuousO restored it after I reverted it.)  Is it not possible to determine this user&rsquo;s IP address, or the IP address of the other sockpuppets operating on these pages, and compare them? Can the admins not develop some evidence that 66.20.28.21 is circumventing the ruling, and take action? Those of us following the career of this editor have mostly viewed it as a source of unacceptable bias constantly inserted through edit wars; but now we are dealing with simple vandalism. What can you do?&mdash; Ford 05:51, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)

I am a new admin, and haven't done this before, but let me try to help. See my note on the WP:RFAr page. I copied your request there. alteripse 14:35, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It seems that the consensus is for further disruption of this kind to be dealt with immediately, which is good. On the other hand, why must we wait until further disruption? This has been going on quite a while since the decision was made, and I do not see that there has been any enforcement. &mdash; Ford 00:22, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

I share your distress at our lack of an immune system. Since I just became part of the "administration" here, I'll see what I can do. I think the applicable concept here is "mole whacking" in hope that the moles tire before the admins do. Wish me luck. alteripse 00:31, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please note the edit to Marietta, Georgia today. Thanks. &mdash; Ford 14:37, 2005 Feb 15 (UTC)

blocked & reverted alteripse 16:17, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Great Lakes Storm of 1913
I've posted this article at Featured article candidates/Great Lakes Storm of 1913. -- brian0918 &#153;  23:20, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!! -- brian0918 &#153;  04:53, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your encouragement. I am new to the wikiworld and have primarily a clinical interest, but then I am interested also in everything else. So this is the best on the Internet. Ekem 23:46, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Brent Collins
Indeed, I only wrote his article based on what was there at IMDB. There is an email address there, of the person who wrote the article. I'll email him and have him clarify it for me. In the meantime, feel free to edit anything that doesn't sound right, and I can pencil in the clarifications later. Mike H 17:03, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)


 * Regarding his dwarfism, that's just not in debate. He was very short (I'd be surprised if he was above four feet in height), and his roles on sitcoms such as The Golden Girls note this (example storyline: Can Rose date a dwarf?) Mike H 17:07, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

Then why remove him from the list in the dwarf article? The only thing that doesn't fit then would be the late growth spurt. The rest is unusual and unlucky but not unbelievable. thanks alteripse 22:22, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * The weird circumstances made it sound as if he didn't belong totally in the dwarf article...like they typecast him as a dwarf but he really wasn't, or something. I don't know; it's all very confusing and I'm tempted to just remove all the Marfan stuff until someone else can back it up; I don't think that'll happen. Do you mind doing it for me? I see myself being very busy tomorrow. Mike H 10:54, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration case
The case against Robert Blair has been accepted. Please bring any further evidence to Requests for arbitration/Robert Blair/Evidence - David Gerard 18:42, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Cantos
Thank you for your vote on WP:FAC, praise is always welcome. Filiocht 08:53, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Glyc(osyl)ation
Go ahead. I know very little about the stuff, and then more about glycosylation. JFW | T@lk  18:16, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee ruling
The case against Robert Blair has closed. Please see the final decision for details. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 19:28, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)

anion
I'm pretty sure you're wrong about anions: in general, they are negatively charged (though I do like your presentation on remembering an- and cat- prefixes). Anyway, have a look at the Reference_desk and correct me if I'm wrong. - Nunh-huh 00:17, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

M.D.?
Are you an M.D.? Just curious, because you seem interested in medicine. Neutralitytalk 02:24, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC) Yes.

Abuse from John Gohde
John Gohde, previously known as Mr-Natural-Health and once banned for three months, brought a request against Snowspinner, who has been monitoring Gohde's activity for several weeks, for systematically reverting Gohde's addition of infoboxes to articles dealing with alternative medicine. The arbitrators rejected this request, but agreed to consider Snowspinner's "counterclaim" that Gohde had "returned to the behavior which got him in trouble twice before."

I suggest that you join Snowspinner, and perhaps set up a new Request for Comments in regards to John Gohde. Sadly, he is again harassing any Wikipedia user who dares disagree with him. I am saddened to see that he is harassing you, and lying about me. (BTW, I actually am a scientist, and Gohde's claim to the contrary is libel.) RK 20:45, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

gedday
hi! it seems they let anybody become an admin these days ;-)

hope you're well. I've become increasing distracted by my own site (gasboys.net) so my muse for writing anything other than MCQs has gone a bit quiet lately.

anyway congrats! Erich 12:12, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

DC trip
Please list all your available dates in the table at Meetup/Wikipedians of the East Coast field trip. Thanks. -- brian0918 &#153;  18:34, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Normal distribution
I really regret the acrimonious tone of our exchange over at Peer_review. It is still unclear to me whether or not I have addressed your concerns, though, because you replied to user:taxman while I was busy writing and dealing with edit conflicts and you never replied to me. All I have to say is that I know very little about medical practice, but that there are a whole lot of reasons (mathematical and biological) why the results of biological growth should be lognormal an not normal, and that I can imagine a whole lot of practical reasons why medical practice would use the normal.

As for your comment about college-educated adults, I doubt that 99.9% of college educated adults could tell you much about the normal distribution. Mathematical education of nonmathematicians is usually abysmal through no fault of the nonmathematicians, and considering how hard it is already for people to learn to work with the normal distribution, these nuances would be out of place in most introductory expositions. But this is an encyclopedia after all, and the devil is in the details. &mdash; Miguel 12:20, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)

By the way, the kinds of techniques you want to see discussed probably belong under descriptive statistics or exploratory data analysis. I am by training more interested in building and testing models. &mdash; Miguel 17:19, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)

A good read on the lognormal distribution. &mdash; Miguel 09:33, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

DC Meetup will be May 7/8
The DC Meetup date has been finalized to May 7/8. Even if you can only come one of the days, that's still fine. Please watch this page for new details, which will be posted in the next couple days: Meetup/Wikipedians of the East Coast field trip -- brian0918  &#153;  16:12, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

So...I suprised you?
Ouch - you thought I was not an English speaker? Wow, I must sound far more unintelligent than I ever imagined. I made the spoonfeeding remark because I felt as though I was pestering you (I was trying to be nice)- I thought when you made your response you were being rude, as if to say "my, my aren't you an idiot" but perhaps I was mistaken? How did you know I like Dylan? Anyways, I'm not sure what the point of your post on my talk page was - should I feel embarassed or stupid because you found my unintelligent due to my post? To be honest, I'm not too familiar with the structuralist movement, but I did know Dickens pre-dated it significantly and I suppose that is the reason for my initial confusion in response to your first post. --Nadsat 02:01, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

No, no - I am VERY glad that you posted on my talk page - yes, one of the downsides of internet interactions: how one's words are perceived by another is never quite the way that is intended. From what I understand you were trying to make amends, and I appreciate that greatly (if that is the case). So please do not feel as though you should have quit messages ago. Friends?

If the answer to my last inquiry is yes...then am I to understand that you are a doctor/involved in the medical profession? If so (and even if you are not) I think I could use your help... --Nadsat 02:28, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Death
Check out the abortion page and read the first sentence, and then go to the talk page. There is a debate going on started by others (the most recent one started by myself) about whether or not the first sentence and definition of abortion is POV. I figured if you are involved with medicine you would have a background of the science behind the matter, etc. I just posted something on there (it's the most recent one) in response to others, and another definition, too. Do you have any suggestions/think the page is currently POV/think you can come up with something better? Muchas gracias, senor. --Nadsat 02:43, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Please read my reply on the abortion talk page. I don't think that the original sentence was POV. And it's much clearer language. Str1977 15:31, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Dear Alteripse, I see your point and I concur with you on fetus/embryo. (changes there were not from me) I also see the effect you are considering. However, I think the "without survival" is really awkward (and I know why others are more comfortable with it) - it'd make sense only if the death was some side-effect of the procedure, but it's not. Consider, whether you'd describing beheading someone like this: "severing head from the body at the neck, without survival of the subject"? I don't think so. But thanks for your consideration. Str1977 15:52, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, of course - but thank you for trying. I agree that these types of articles are Wikipedia's major weaknesses. I just figured I would call in someone more experienced here into the matter (like you)- but unfortunatlely, perhaps no solution can be found. Thanks again for trying, and if you have any further suggestions, feel free to let me know. --Nadsat 17:26, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Alteripse

I noticed you changed the menstruation article by saying you woudl move unsubstantiatable sentences to the talk page, but I don't see it there. Can you put them there, so we can discuss them? thanks.

BrainyBabe 01:25, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:MacGyverMagic/Desk
I'm swamped in all sorts of work, could you perhaps do some cleanup on the abovementioned article? Mgm|(talk) 10:30, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

TSH
In cancer you mentioned that blocking TSH is a hormonal treatment of thyroid cancer. I've honestly never heard of this modality. How does it work/how is it done? JFW | T@lk  14:12, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * In all forms of thyroid cancer, we treat with thyroxine not just to replace the missing hormone after removal of the thyroid, but to suppress the TSH and remove a stimulus to regrowth of the cancer. alteripse 15:15, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ahh, is it that simple? Sorry for removing it. Please make further edits as you see fit, it's done the article a lot of good. Expect the CAM people to complain about the cancer quackery (did I hear shark cartilage somewhere) link.... JFW | T@lk  15:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The difference between thyroxine replacement after thyroidectomy for Graves' and for cancer is that for cancer we want the TSH not just normalized but actually suppressed to near undetectable levels. Do you think there is anything inaccurate in my additions to the CAM stuff? I thought I was being generous by emphasizing the reasons for the appeal of it-- we could put their favorite phrase in there: "poison, cut, and burn"... alteripse 15:48, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, I'm just expecting the CAM warriors to bite. Btw I didn't realise you did adult medicine as well, or do you have pediatric cases of thyroid ca in your follow-up? JFW | T@lk  16:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I only take care of children, but they get thyroid cancer too. alteripse 17:20, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rarely, I hope. I'm worried about the state of our Wikiproject. Where has everybody gone? Also: I'm trying to make obesity a featured article (hopefully before cancer if all goes well). Naturally there is still lots of work; I'm presently reading a poorly written Italian paper on historical perceptions of obesity. Is there a chance you could have a look? Secondary obesity is poorly covered now, and may merit some wisdom. You probably get a lot of referrals for fat kids. JFW | T@lk  18:02, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Far more common but somehow even more depressing than thyroid cancer. I have already sort of promised myself to a couple of other articles, but perhaps eventually if I get an excessively round tuit... alteripse 18:13, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Over and undetermined Thanks for your detailed and helpful comment. I am new to this, so excuse me if I am entering this in the wrong way and the wrong place (and I don't know how to do the heading) but I have raised an issue of NPOV in regard to an aspect of your phraseology and I would appreciate your comment. It's still on the Reference page. Thanks. Jeffrey Newman 04:31, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unblock me please
Can you please unblock me as I unfortunately seem to share an IP address with a vandal 195.93.21.104.

GordyB 28 June 2005 11:24 (UTC)

I got unblocked shortly afterwards but for some reason when you are unblocked sometimes you stay blocked for a few pages. Very odd.

Anyway. Thanks. GordyB 29 June 2005 09:39 (UTC)

Please stop blocking me, or at least reply to my emails jimfbleak 29 June 2005 05:11 (UTC) Sorry I got so ratty, it's just frustrating when people seem to be queuing up to block me! jimfbleak 29 June 2005 15:51 (UTC)

chemistry
Hi! MgM says I should pick on you, see:

I suggest you drop those chemistry articles off at User:Alteripse's place. He's better versed in organic chemistry than I am. - Mgm|(talk) June 28, 2005 12:18 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fabartus" This was the post in need:
 * Also need a memory check. Did I write you asking that you take over Organosulfur compounds which I stubbed as far as 27 y.o. chemistry will take me! Or was that one of the messages I lost the other night? No matter, here's another handoff!  Looks to me that Hydrogen Sulfide needs some serious attention as well. (I was a Chem major myself once upon a yesterday). (No hurry from me!)
 * Nice to meet you! Hope you and your ToDo list feel the same! LOL User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 28 June 2005 12:42 (UTC)

Masculinization vs. Defeminization
Rather than figure out the e-mailing thing, I put two relevant files up: http://www.psych.ualberta.ca/~phurd/papers/Wallen_05.pdf http://www.psych.ualberta.ca/~phurd/papers/Wallen_andB02.pdf let me know if you have problems downloading them. --Pete.Hurd

OK, I'll delete these from my webpage (copyright bruhaha). I havn't read them thouroughly, but plan to over the next week (in which I'll be largely incommunicado). I've also assigned a student to take a crack at the them while I'm gone. I guess I'll see how the subject lines up WRT morphological/behavioural human/non-human divisions in the coverage once I've got a grasp on it. My first reaction would be to divide mamalian/non-mamalian, then try to find some way to divide a morphology/brain/behaviour continuum from more specifically human cultural issues, but that's just my background. --Pete.Hurd

Fathers
Thanks for your answer at WP:RD about fathers on birth certificates. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking July 8, 2005 20:50 (UTC)

Revert war
I noticed that you reverted Image:Serb lands03.jpg to the version posted by Harvardian. However, you are probably not aware that User.Harvardian constantly deleting my posts from the image talk page. You can see image talk page history here:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_talk:Serb_lands03.jpg&action=history

Also, you can see that User:Harvardian is a noted vandal:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/ARD_and_Jwalker

I proposed now this image for deletion, since it is impossible to discuss with the User:Harvardian about this issue. He just refuses the normal discussion. User:PANONIAN

Like most North Americans I do not understand Balkan conflicts and shouldn't have even looked at the map. I think I reverted by mistake when I was just trying to go back and forth to understand the differences between the images, since that doesn't seem to work the same way as different versions of the text. Don't worry, I will keep my nose out of it. alteripse 22:30, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Your question on my RFA
I missed your question on my RFADmin, sorry. It turns out to be a good question and quite hard to answer. I'm going to have to think about it, and its very late now. William M. Connolley 23:25:47, 2005-07-10 (UTC).

I've updated my answer, its still not great, but its an attempt. William M. Connolley 22:00:28, 2005-07-12 (UTC).

Nothing wrong with your answer. I support your efforts on the articles and it looks like there should be no problem with your adminship. You are braver than I am to argue with open name. alteripse 23:25, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Defender
Lucky you, to be around during the golden age of arcade games. ;) I know about the game because I use the arcade machine emulator MAME, which runs on Windows, to play it. I don't know if there's a Windows version or not. Spottedowl 00:44, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Lucky me, but downloading the MAME system and getting it to run it sounds like way too much trouble, not to mention invoking a demon long ago exorcised. Thanks anyway. alteripse 02:53, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Cooling effect of oil on human body
I'm afraid you were right about Reference Desk. See my update there. :-) -- Sundar \talk \contribs 07:12, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Added a minor note in the above discussion at RD. By the way, what title would you suggest for the article? -- Sundar \talk \contribs 10:15, July 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * I am transferring some of the RD text to culture-specific syndrome. Does your specific Tamil syndrome have a common name that can be transliterated as an article title? Just make it a brief article such as xxx is a culture-specific syndrome of painful urination and pelvic "heat" familiar in south India, especially in the Tamil culture. It occurs in males and females. It is popularly attributed to xxx. It is usually treated by xxx.
 * What do you think? Change or embellish as you think fit. Can you add anything else. alteripse 12:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Will work on that soon. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 03:36, July 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * Created Suudu. See also my comments on the "ethicality" of doctors playing alongwith the placebo effect. In our culture, the ends justify the means. Please also see my quote at Talk:Culture-specific syndrome. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 05:48, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Reference Desk
It wasn't a stupid question, but one that had an obvious and straightforward, real answer, which you didn't even attempt to provide. Your POV of his sexual activity has no place on the RD and was not an aswer to his question. From the RD:

How to answer a question James 13:32, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Please be thorough, providing as much of the answer as you are able.
 * Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.
 * Link to articles on Wikipedia which may have further information relevant to the question.
 * The Reference desk is not a soapbox. If you wish to argue a particular viewpoint, please do so on an appropriate talk page.

Turner's and XXX
I'm moving this discussion here, because the reference desk is no longer a proper place to discuss the issue.

The fact that there are more people living with monosomy X than with any other monosomy is only indicative of the fact that monosomy X is far more prevalent at conception than all other monosomies. According to the Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics, it occurs in 3% of conceptions, but 99% of these result in spontaneous abortion. The resultant .03% of live births having Turner's is larger than any other monosomy, but only because it is so common at conception. Clearly, there is a strong selection against monosomy X. Further, the majority of live births with Turner's are mosaics, meaning that not all of their cells karyotype as 45,X.

As for XXX, I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying, which is likely the fault of my writing. I merely am trying to say that triple-X is often undiagnosed and rarely has obvious signs or severe complications, which is far better than can be said for every other trisomy. There are statistically significant differences in height and IQ in trisomy X, but that there are normal people at all with trisomy X is significant and makes it a far less serious syndrome than any other trisomy. James 17:41, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

I just found this note, after answering another round at the ref desk. I agree it's time to stop. Your paragraph here on XXX now shows you understand the difference between "any effect" and obvious or severe ones, which was my original contention that you were "close but not quite". As far as Turner's goes, I am not disputing that it usually causes fetal death, but conceptuses with missing autosomes do not even get far enough to be identified as "miscarried" because they are so incompatible with fetal development: you have no evidence that the original nondisjunction events affect the sex chromosomes hundreds of times more often than autosomes, just that they get far enough to be identified in aborted tissue. I doubt you could find an example of even a single case report of a functional adult missing an autosome in a large proportion of body cells, while there are maybe 50,000 people with Turner syndrome living in the United States, going to school and working. A missing autosome is much worse than a missing sex chromosome and Turner syndrome is no exception. Is there anything left to be said? alteripse 20:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Prohormone
You reverted my edits on Prohormone. I have added my justifcation for removing and adding content on Talk:Prohormone. Please discuss. johnSLADE (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Prolactin
Hi David. Alex Tan and myself are having a discussion with an anon on talk:Prolactin in the role of hyperprolactinaemia in the growth retardation of patients with coeliac disease. Could you offer your expert opinion? JFW | T@lk  18:20, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Request
Hello. A couple of days ago, I decided to tackle rewriting balanitis xerotica obliterans, as the present article is simply too awful for words. Since it'll take a few days, I've made a start over at balanitis xerotica obliterans/temp, and am gathering references and beginning to flesh out the text. I'd appreciate any input you might have. I'm particularly keen to ensure that I haven't missed any important refs. Thanks. - Jakew 20:39, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Comment on reversion
I don't think you looked at the before and after of the disease definition very clearly. While there may have been problems with my revision, I believe there were more problems in the previous page. Moreover, the "syndrome" definition wasn't my invention but rather my effort to make the existing incoherence more coherent. I didn't create the "collection of symptoms" phrase - except to interpolate it from the "collection of s" phrase that was on the page you reverted TO.

Hans Joseph Solbrig 19:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

More comments on the talk page

Hans Joseph Solbrig 19:50, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, if you were going to revert to something, you wanted to revert to the version previous to what you reverted to. This version has a somewhat coherent organization. The one by PhilO. This one doesn't have the one paragraph sentence fragment for its first section.

Hans Joseph Solbrig 20:00, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Reference desk "all listings" page at WP:RD/ALL
Hi Alteripse, I know you have expressed some reservations with the recent changes made to the reference desk. There is in fact a full page listing located at Reference desk/all, with the shortcuts WP:RD/A or WP:RD/ALL. The only difference is that the new questions will not appear at the bottom of the "all" page - only ones from the miscellaneous category would. The rest of the new questions will appear approximately 1/4, 2/4 and 3/4 ths of the way down. There is a link to this "see all" page from the main reference desk page, but perhaps it hasn't been made prominent enough - from the reference desk talk, it seems to me that many Wikipedians have missed this link.

I really hope that the "all" page would preserve enough of the functionality from the previous reference desk that would suit your needs. There are certainly some changes, but I really hope that you'll still consider answering questions on the occasion. I really liked your answering style, and it was always refreshing to read your posts. Would you please reconsider and help out answering questions as you see fit? Maybe try out the new organization of the pages for a day or so? Please let me know your thoughts on this, as these changes were certainly not intendend to drive away very knowledgable Wikipedians from helping out at the Reference Desk. I really hope everyone would still see you around answering questions! --HappyCamper 23:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Category
Placed your userpage in category physicians.--Nomen Nescio 09:49, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

RFC
If you want all RFC listings on a single page, you can still use Requests for comment/All. It may need some work on the layout or the template though, feel free to improve that if you want. Radiant_ &gt;|&lt; 08:02, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

links for john
 

Ulzim semi paralysis
Thanks for the reply. I left a note in the article that it could be an error - Buck Divecha. But looking closely it doesn't say that it killed him, just that he was suffering from it at the time of his death. Tintin 01:31, 12 September 2005 (UTC) We have a couple of neuro people around here and I am not, but it still doesn't even remind me of anything, fatal or otherwise. alteripse 03:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Can you please let me know the nick of any of them. Just to be sure. Tintin 03:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * See list at WikiProject Clinical medicine. Also, look for the person who expanded the cerebellum article recently. alteripse 03:49, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks Tintin 04:48, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

NOONAN SYNDROME:
I have changed a few things on this article (from a suffer herself who has done multiple research on NS and has met Jackie Noonan et al etc ). Hope thats OK. Thanks for your work. the more info on NS available the better as we need more knowledge about this common, but often unheard of disorder.

Response to: "Off-Label Use; FDA Application for"
If I'm tracking properly this is apparently the location to express my thanks for the guidance, re. Subject/headline.

I can appreciate having raised the question about my seeking this type of information here on WIKIPEDIA. 'Makes it quite obvious I've never been down this path before. This does not make me a 'novice to the cause', however.

I'm going to exchange my credentials for the "several hour course on ethics of human research" indicated as requisite to "be(ing) a principal investigator for a research project involving people." To wit: a. Beginnnig with my two years as a navy medic in charge of 32 bed pre-post op abdominal and thoracis surgery ward; including scrubbing

I did not intend offense, just skepticism about chance of success. I am sympathetic to the rude surprise in store for any clinician in the US who begins to deal with IRB rules for what he thinks is a simple, safe, straightforward study (even just to gather grouped data). Perhaps you can persevere and win our True Grit award. alteripse 14:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Response to: "Off-Label Use; FDA Application for"
If I'm tracking properly this is apparently the location to express my thanks for the guidance, re. Subject/headline.

I can appreciate having raised the question about my seeking this type of information here on WIKIPEDIA. 'Makes it quite obvious I've never been down this path before. This does not make me a 'novice to the cause', however.

I'm going to exchange my credentials for the "several hour course on ethics of human research" indicated as requisite to "be(ing) a principal investigator for a research project involving people." a. Beginnnig with my two years as a navy medic in charge of 32 bed pre-post op abdominal and thoracic surgery ward - with commendation ('52 - '54); b. Medical attendant during BBA study period...followed with 2 years post grad. pre-med life sciences during same period as          the discovery of 'desoxyribonucleic acid'; c. A continued, unabiding interest in medicine and materia medica; d. Volunteer ambulance paramedic; e. Distinguished Benefactor of Mayo Foundation; f. Ten year prostate cancer survivor (having refused radiaton therapy to clear remaining 'dirty margins' at bladder...in favor         of extended combined hormonal therapy in conjunction with my research and utilization of continued holistic therapy); g. Post endarterectomy, left carotid with 95+% blockage, following TIAs and stroke that was addressed 'expeditiously'... permitting a return to Mayo Clinic/Rochester for surgery (BASIS for designing and the pursuit of a study to authenticate         a new therapy for reversal of fatty plaque stenosis and elimination of unwanted calcium ... utilizing tetracycline HCl         as one of only two effective bactericides in the destruction of decalcified nanobacteria - once 'defrocked' of their         protective calcium apatite shells by the use of a combination of neutraceuticals and chelating agent); NOTE: The two studies referenced in the subject response, regarding the failure of antibiotics to control or reverse vascular disease clearly fail to take into account the mechanics of calcification and the narrow spectrum of                  antibiotics that will destroy nanobacteria - the underlying cause of arterial disease and unwanted calcium in the human physiology as demonstrated by Kajander, Ciftcioglu, Maniscalco and Taylor...as well as the additional proof of their existence by Drs. Virginia Miller and John Lieske of Mayo Clinic/Rochester.)                    My veterinary son and I both had the privilege of spending an afternoon with Dr. Miller and Dr. Lieske to discuss                   their abstract on "...nanobacterial-like structures..." and view these creatures (100-200 billionths of a meter in size) under microscope in the culture flask they were so kind enough to have brought to us. As a matter of                    information, these nano-cells are completely devoid of any organelles, yet self-replicate once every two to three                      days!                   FURTHER NOTATION:  Mayo database for long term use of tetracycline has established its 'safety' for extended                                      period use.     h.  Add to these the nine months' personal research towards design and development of a clinical study for the purpose set         forth above which includes:           i.  Establishing a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation to serve as the 'entity' conducting the study;          ii.  Establishing the list of conditions be included in the study;         iii.  Designing (for completion by prospective study subjects and their attending physicians) the application form for participation in the study; iv. Creating and sending to hospitals in select areas within six regions of the U.S., invitations to participate as              'sponsoring' attending physicians (urban, suburban and rural patient environments); v. Subject application data (and 'selection' criteria) to include age, sex, work stye, living environment, exercise level, body mass index, meds taken - including OTC, stress level, personality profile, ethnicity, medical history, allergies - including specific allergies related to contrast medium adverse reaction potential, blood type, cholesterol and triglyceride levels, and blood and pulse pressures; vi. Complete and comprehensive "Informed Consent" form executed by applicant and attending physician; copy filed with IRB and Study 'entity'. vii. Paid 'pre-test' for nanobacteria antigens/antibodies (nano positivity) followed by test for tetracycline allergy; viii. Research and conclusion for preferential computed tomography scan equipment, methoods, contrast media for safety, with 64-slice Siemens - software for conventional calcium scoring (0 though >400) plus percentage of fatty plaque stenosis of ROI's (regions of interest) using nonionic contrast medium that permits distinction between soft plaque and blood (not previously available) and with near zero potential for adverse reaction, reduced to zero through "qualification" criteria; initial baseline scan and final, 4 month study evaluation scan; each scan 'read' by the same two radiologists...'scoring' both initial and final scans; ix. Transportation and lodging paid for by study funding, including companion support if required; x. Therapy supplies and tetracycline provided all attending physicians for bi-weekly dispensing at time of weight and B/P check, monthly blood draw for forwarding to lab of medical facility conducting scans and bloodwork, for uniformity and consistency in calibration and methods. Costs absorbed by Study entity. Bi-weekly reports delivered to attending physician for use in assuring study participant compliance. xi. Records of blood draw results cross referenced with physical attributes, bi-weekly reports, study participant codes, condition being studied, group codes (age/sex) hopefully will afford more data for research and/or conclusions. xii. Funding to be generated via internet solicitation. Research indicates 765,000 (of 293,000,000 population) willing and able to contribute $15 towards study comprised of six hundred (600) participants and their attending physicians. Total... $ 11,475,000. Further solicitations will be addressed to health insurers and industry: Insurers towards reduction/elimination of high cost invasive procedures :: Industry to participate in reduction of insurance premiums and lost time/key personnel disabilities; long and short term. xiii. Web site development for constant updates of receipts and disbursements; study results by age, sex, condition group studied. xiv. Staff to maintain income disbursement records for website and corporation; xv. Staff for recording medical data and results. xvi. Solicitation of lodging and travel for participation to contain cost on a vital study. xvii. Solicitation of Omron for Intelli-sense B/P monitoring equipment (for daily monitoring; bi-weekly report). xviii. Bonding costs, printing, postage, fax (for communicating reports as needed), misc. supplies; xix. Cost of scans, readings, medical facility, storing data generated. I'm working to make this happen...and realize it will not be accomplished soon...but will keep pecking. Have just been advised that the road has become much 'bumpier' since Duke experienced a death in one of its 'off-label' studies; that it had a severely negative impact upon IRB willingness to participate in them - given these 'relaxations' are from 1998.

Nonetheless, I'll go for that "True Grit" award!!!

216.21.190.154 21:06, 3 October 2005 (UTC) Wildcat444

You sound like a man with a plan, and may well be the exception to my pessimism. Best of luck. alteripse 23:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Halibutt
Since you have supported me during my RfA, I wonder if you could review and comment on the RfA for Halibutt, the first person I have nominated myself. There seem to be a heated debate and votes of experienced, unbiased editors would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

You got me into this mess!
Just kidding, you didn't. But the unintended consequences of acting upon your invitation have resulted in this [.  I have had it and I must go.  You are one of the sane and gentle people here, and since you were instrumental at the start, perhaps you can put an end to it all, so I pass it on to you if you wish to do or say anything, including deleting the article that I wish I had never started. [[User:Ockham|Ockham]]