User talk:Axl/archive 9

Cardiology task force
-- MifterBot I (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:35, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Maen. K. A. (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Osteitis fibrosa cystica
I was working on the article the other day and came across some statistics on the survival/recurrance rate post-surgery for OFC patients. Would this best be placed in "Treatment" or "Epidemiology?"Strombollii (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, could be either. See how it looks in the "Epidemiology" section. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  08:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, wait. It should be in a "Prognosis" section. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  18:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Darn, another section. Haha, I'm trying to find the info now. Also, what, exactly do I put in a classification section? Strombollii (talk) 01:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Primary hyperparathyroidism is E21.0 in the ICD-10 classification system. This group includes hyperplasia of the parathyroid, as well as OFC. The broader group:-

E21 Hyperparathyroidism and other disorders of the parathyroid gland
 * E21.0 Primary hyperparathyroidism
 * Hyperplasia of parathyroid
 * OFC
 * E21.1 Secondary hyperparathyroidism (not classified elsewhere)
 * E21.2 Other hyperparathyroidism
 * E21.3 Unspecified hyperparathyroidism
 * E21.4 Other specified disorders of the parathyroid
 * E21.5 Unspecified disorders of the parathyroid

Axl ¤  [Talk]  14:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of WTPRN
WTPRN has been nominated for deletion and you were involved in a previous afd. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Articles for deletion/WTPRN (2nd nomination). Thank you.--Sloane (talk) 22:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Martyn_Godfrey
Hi! I made a page about an author named Martyn_Godfrey. Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyn_Godfrey. Could you please edit the page? Thanks!Neptunekh (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

You're a class act
Just wanted you to know that I read your posts (on RefDesk, WPMED, etc) closely because I find them rewarding, intellectually and for the sense of community that keeps me coming back to WP all the time. Thanks! --Scray (talk) 00:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

RE: Have a cup of tea
Perhaps, I'm still considering running in the future, but not as early as I was once considering. That dispute doesn't bother me to badly, because at the end of it my point of view was indeed the correct one in the eyes of the community. CadenS was blocked for incivility, and ParaGreen13 was warned for his remarks. However, my reaction to ParaGreen13 was indeed not appropriate and for that reason I won't be running for another couple of months, when I've had the chance to recover from this blemish with good work on encyclopaeidia articles and other adminship areas (particularly AfD). Do you think this would be appropriate? —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a good response. By the way, have you created a "Good article" yet? It would really help your next RfA. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  07:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've not created one, per se, as I'm not a great article writer. I've written some stubs and C-class articles, but it's hard to get these to GA for lack of reliable sources. I am, however, prone to editing other articles created by others and helping them achieve FA and GA status. I've done this with several article so far, such as subarachnoid hemorrhage. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 11:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. I know that you provide a valuable service to Wikipedia. We are all here to improve the quality and content. In my opinion (and that of many other RfA reviewers), it is helpful for an admin candidate to demonstrate a high standard of articlespace content contribution because this shows that the candidate has an appreciation of the work involved. This improves communication between the admin and other users. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  11:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, and I agree, but I think there are varying degrees of opinion on this matter at RfA. Some like to see high quality FA contributions, some like GAs, some ask that you merely contribute regularly to articles and some want you to create articles. Very few people meet all these categories, but I like to think I contribute thoroughly to the encyclopaedia in my own way. If I get opposed because I didn't create an article and then take it to GA, I can cope with that. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 11:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  11:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Quick question
Is there a preference, when citing medical articles, that a bibliography is not included? I'm looking to cite a book with citations spanning over a hundred pages so the reflist followed by bibliography format is appealing, as seen on banker horse. Any preferences?Strombollii (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are citing a book several times from different pages, it is preferable to use a bibliography, with the author & page numbers in the "References" section (just like in the "Banker horse" article). Axl  ¤  [Talk]  18:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I presume I'd then move all my references over to the bibliography? Such as journals? Strombollii (talk) 20:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Journal articles are short enough that someone who wants to check the reference doesn't have to search too long to find the info in the article. Don't move journal article references to the bibliography. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  08:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That makes my life much easier. Thank you. Strombollii (talk) 13:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * :-) Axl  ¤  [Talk]  14:20, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Another quick queston... Are pictures/images a necessary inclusion for GAN? I was under the impression that a lack of images did not immediately disqualify an article. However, User: Jmh649 left a message at Talk:Osteitis fibrosa cystica/GA3, saying, essentially, that GAN was impossible without the inclusion of images. Clarification? Am I totally wrong on this instance?Strombollii (talk) 13:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Pictures are not essential. I commented at the GA review. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  17:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you again =] Strombollii (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of List of Exalted comics
A tag has been placed on List of Exalted comics requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Pontificalibus (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia chapter launched
As someone who has previously expressed an interest in Wikimedia UK, you may be interested that the chapter has now re-formed and we are ready to elect a new Board to focus on our new plans. There are many exciting ideas around for things we can do, including content access partnerships, generating free content photographs and media relations in the UK. However, these all need the support of members like yourself! You can join up here, donate here and get involved here. Join before 24th April and you can help elect our new Board. Come along to our AGM in Manchester on 26th to help set our priorities. Other ways of keeping in touch are set out here. Hope to hear from you soon! AndrewRT(Talk) 22:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Exalted comic.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Exalted comic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:08, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Withdrawl
Hey Axl, well it wasn't me commenting upon "negroes", but rather it was me who responded with a lack of civility to the person using such statements. Thanks for the comment, anywho! — Cyclonenim | Chat 21:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Joining wikiproject medicine
Hi, at the moment I'm in the middle of revision so most of my contributions are minor edits and grammar or posting on the reference desk as you saw. Nonetheless as wiki is normally open for quick reference and I'm coming across articles (more stubs really) that I think should be improved, and apparently I should know the topics so I should be able to do so. I imagine getting a hang of the editting will come as I go... [Angina] watch out, I'm a-coming. (Is there a way of saying on my user page I'm collaborating with the wikiproject so that other people don't inconveniance themselves)MedicRoo (talk) 23:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

OFC X-ray
I concur with the need for markings on the x-ray: but I'm really unable to mark it, due to my absolute lack of histological understanding. Any chance of help here? haha. Strombollii (talk) 00:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The x-ray isn't of good quality. I can make out lesions in the tibias. The lesion in the right tibia (on the left of the picture) is about two-thirds of the way down the shaft. The lesion in the left tibia (right of the picture) is smaller, about half-way along the shaft, laterally. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  17:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I honestly hate to ask. But I'm absolutely incapable of reading this radiograph. Is there any way you could mark off the lesions with arrows?  Really, feel free to tell me to bug off =] Strombollii (talk) 02:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I used an online editor to quickly add a couple of arrows. Please use your own program to put appropriate arrows onto your original image. Axl ¤  [Talk]  07:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I just had another look at the picture and there's another lesion in the proximal left tibia (upper right of image). Axl  ¤  [Talk]  21:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks Axl so much for looking up a book for me! That is what I have suspected, they lump the limb functions into one lump under the combined "interposed nuclei" heading. Guess I'll have to ask my prof on Monday.

76.65.14.179 (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Shameless thankspam


FlyingToaster Barnstar Hello Axl! Thank you so much for your support in my  recent RfA , which passed with a tally of 126 / 32 / 5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.  Flying Toaster 

changed user names
please don't tease about something which represented a genuine off-wiki problem. The least obtrusive thing to do would to remove names from your edit at the RfA. Email me for details, if you like. DGG (talk) 04:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I apologise to anyone who may have been upset by my comment. I didn't even know that "our friend" had changed names, until I looked for his userpage as a result of the !voter's comment. The fact that our friend's userpage redirects to the new userpage shows me (and anyone else who cares to try) that they are one and the same. I am not aware of (and uninterested in) our friend's "off-wiki problem".


 * Now that two other people have responded to my comment, I am unsure how to anonymise the situation. However you may feel free to edit my RfA comment as you see fit. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  06:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I had a closer look at our friend's new user talk page. I have clearly made a serious mistake. Again, my apologies to all concerned. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  06:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Drv for List of extraordinary diseases and conditions
An AfD for this article, which you participated in, was recently closed as "no consensus." I have request a deletion review here .Bali ultimate (talk) 16:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Reactive arthritis
Thanks for your contributions to the Reactive arthritis article. Like I said in the Doc's Mess, I'm not a clinician but one of those annoying patients who has a chronic disease and knows how to use Medline - basically a mildly retarded first level nurse (isn't that what they call them in the UK?). Anyway, the article needs some more stylistic work, but I'm currently aiming to put in more info and later worry about copy editing. Please by all means add/edit some more.

I can't find cites for several things in the article. I'm hesitant to add "Cite needed" tags to every little detail though. E.g., "Eye involvement occurs in about 50% of men with urogenital reactive arthritis and about 75% of men with enteric reactive arthritis." I admit I haven't read all ~6,000 articles on Medline, but this is not mentioned in any standard reference I can find. Again, clinicians...?

Incidentally, if I may ask, are you a pulmonologist or a GP or a rheumatologist or what? The full "Reiter's syndrome" is technically a Rare Disease, so I'm curious. --George (talk) 19:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Cite needed" tags are quite helpful, both for yourself if you are planning to continue improving the article, and also for other editors who may consider adding references. I often add references to replace these tags. [I'm a pulmonologist.] Axl  ¤  [Talk]  06:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

LP and surgical procedure
Hi, Axl! How are you doing? I am really enjoying the quiet and cool evenings that New England has been experiencing. It's a lot better than the snow! I have a quick question regarding how you define a lumbar puncture. I think that I originally wrote that it's a surgical procedure but you have indicated that you don't think it is. The reason why I indicated a LP is a surgical procedure is that the actual LP article itself refers to it as a neurosurgical procedure. I wonder what you think about this? Let me know when you can. Thanks, Axl!!! Basket of Puppies 03:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, Basket of Puppies. Our article on lumbar puncture is accurate. It does not indicate that LP is a neurosurgical procedure. LP is more commonly performed by (non-surgical) physicians. It is performed in the patient's bed on the ward. It uses only local anaesthetic (not general anaesthesia) and it is not done in the operating theatre. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  07:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, Axl. I guess I'm really confused right now. You seem to indicate that the LP article does not indicate that this is a surgical procedure, but the LP article itself is in the "Surgery, Nervous system: neurosurgical procedures (ICD-9-CM V3 01-05)" category. So, I guess I am just confused. Also, I was told by my professors that any time the skin is punctured in order to inject or remove something from the body then it is indeed a surgical procedure. In fact I just checked in my old EMT book and it says that IVs are surgical procedures. What do you think about this? Basket of Puppies  18:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out the anomaly in the template. I have removed the entry. I suppose that people have different definitions for "surgery". Wikipedia's article indicates "Surgery is a medical technology consisting of a physical intervention on tissues". This definition would include the application of cream to the skin. However this definition isn't referenced. Wiktionary's definition is, in my opinion, more accurate: "A procedure involving major incisions to remove, repair, or replace a part of a body". I'll try to find a suitable reference. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  17:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * From Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary, 30th edition: "The branch of medicine that treats diseases, injuries, and deformities by manual or operative methods." From Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 27th edition: "The branch of medicine concerned with the treatment of disease, injury, and deformity by physical operation or manipulation." Axl  ¤  [Talk]  07:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Oxygen Toxicity
Thanks for your copyedits to the article. Your work is always appreciated, but can I check that the change of surfactants to surfactant was accurate? Using the singular implies to me that there is only one compound being used; whereas the source uses "sufactants" as if there are several possible (presumably artificial) medications that could be administered. I don't have the medical expertise to decide what is right, and you're the expert!

While I'm here, could I ask you to a favour, please? Materialscientist has kindly done a copyedit, but I'm uncertain about the effect in places. For instance, one change has been to make "... retinopathic conditions, characterised by alterations to the eye" into "...retinopathic conditions, characterised by alterations to the eyes" - which I know is minor, but doesn't seem to me to convey quite the same idea. I mean, the former says to me we're referring to the structure, the organ; while the latter carries the implication of the general area. I don't know if that makes sense, but all the sources tend to use the singular as well - am I interpreting medical usage correctly, or just being pedantic? More importantly, would you have time to comment, please, on the expansion of all of the acronyms like "CNS". I think it looks cleaner, but I find phrases like "central nervous system oxygen toxicity" to be cumbersome compared to "CNS oxygen toxicity" - the sources use CNS regularly. I think I'm too familiar with the text to be dispassionate, but it feels like using "trinitrotoluene" when I could use "TNT". Another view on this would be appreciated. --RexxS (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The reason I used the singular form was actually because Wikipedia's article uses the singular. Of course you are right that several different companies make different preparations. I'll change the article back to the plural. Regarding the abbreviations, I generally agree that the article is easier to read with these abbreviations in place (although I'm not a "general reader" either). I'll have a closer look at Materialscientist's edits. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  17:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I may have now addressed your concerns in the review, but I'm worried the candidacy may get archived soon. Can I ask if you feel in a position to support its promotion yet, or are there any more issues you would like addressed? P.S. - it wasn't me who misspelt "blindness" (although I did copy & paste your suggestion without spellchecking it :) ). Thanks again for your efforts. --RexxS (talk) 21:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops! How embarrassing. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  22:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Following the last comments by Snowman, I've thought long and hard about the section you kindly wrote on COPD. I now actually feel that it doesn't fit in with causes of oxygen toxicity. In fact, it's an description of the mechanism of carbon dioxide narcosis. If it wasn't for Patel including CO2 narcosis, I'd say it was unrelated to oxygen toxicity, which I still believe is the direct toxic effect of oxygen, not the carbon dioxide toxicity indirectly caused by raised inspired oxygen levels in COPD. "Oxygen toxicity is a condition resulting from the harmful effects of breathing molecular oxygen (O2) at elevated partial pressures." - Snowman quoted to me. It is true that all oxygen toxicities are harmful effects of high ppO2: It does not follow that all harmful effects of high ppO2 are oxygen toxicity. As I said, I couldn't see where more detail on the effect of O2 on COPD would fit in. I think the article has gone down a blind alley. If it isn't oxtox, this much detail shouldn't be in the article. If it is oxtox, it seems to me it should have a mention in "signs and symptoms", "mechanism", "diagnosis", "prevention", "management", "prognosis", "epidemiology" and "history" - a task well beyond my capabilities. Would you have another think about the appropriateness of the inclusion of this section, please. It would help me very much to have an expert medical opinion before I decide on whether to withdraw the FAC nomination. --RexxS (talk) 00:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I have searched Murray & Nadel's Textbook of Respiratory Medicine (fourth edition) for "oxygen toxicity". Here are the relevant hits that I found:-


 * 1) ARDS: "Exposure to high concentrations of oxygen may contribute to or aggravate the acute respiratory distress syndrome.... The sequelae of oxygen toxicity are separable into two phases."
 * 2) These references: Frank, Fox, Davis, Jackson. They are concerned with the cellular mechanisms of oxidative damage rather than clinical syndromes.
 * 3) Diving.
 * 4) A cause of diffuse alveolar damage and interstitial lung disease, especially when used with mechanical ventilation.
 * 5) Paraquat: "In the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome, oxygen toxicity is a particular issue after paraquat exposure."
 * 6) Bronchopulmonary dysplasia.
 * 7) Index: "Hyperoxia – see Oxygen, toxicity of."
 * 8) A reference to COPD: Petty.
 * 9) Safety of long-term oxygen in COPD: "Domiciliary oxygen therapy causes only small increases in arterial pCO2 in patients with hypercapnia and does not result in pulmonary oxygen toxicity."
 * 10) A reference to a review article: Jenkinson.

"Withdraw the FAC nomination"? Do not withdraw the nomination. You're nearly there. This is the last hurdle. I can see why you might be disheartened. (It happened to me too.) Take a break. Have a beer. Then come back in a day or two and finish it. In the meantime, I'll keep working on it. ;-) Axl  ¤  [Talk]  08:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[[File:Dawn (Exalted).jpg]] deleted
You requested deletion at, but you were the sole author of the file's page and its only uploader. I requested a speedy delete for you and it's been deleted. --an odd name 21:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

E-mail
Hi,

could you contact me via e-mail (steven_fruitsmaak AT___ hotmailcom)? I have a private message for you (I'm leaving on holiday, so ignore the vacation response.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

More Than Weird
Hi Axl! I wrote a page about a young adult novel called more than weird. Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_than_weird Could you edit it please? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks very much Axl for the barnstar, and for reviewing hepatorenal syndrome. Best regards -- Samir 18:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

hi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WhatisFeelings%3F#.22Zinc.22_featured_article_candidate

thanks for your message. here's my reply: honesty is the best policy =D WhatisFeelings? (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, on a collaborative effort such as Wikipedia - as in real life - courtesy is a much better policy. --RexxS (talk) 22:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Merci!
Thankyou :) for your edits L&there4;V 21:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Pacemaker syndrome GA Review
Thank you Axl for your time and effort reviewing the PM syndrome article. Your points have been of great help and improved the article's contents. I ticked done to two of your points, but the others still need a little bit extra elaboration so I can tick them as well. Thanks again and I hope to hear from you soon, cheers. GiggsHammouri (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation
Hello Axl. I have joined the Medicine WikiProject at your invitation. I am still a newcomer to the world Wikipedia, but it is my wish to become a valued contributor over time. I appreciate any guidance that will serve to move me in this direction.DiverDave (talk) 14:39, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Great! If you ever need any assistance, feel free to ask me or the Project at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  15:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipages in Need
Pleaseplease help me I need you to help me so YW! Someone, please help me, I post as lets moo I gess or lets moo i gess 7 on this Website please help me. -- Rayqayza Dialga Weird 2210   13:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is strictly buisness (mostly) so I am sending you this message for Wikipages in need.

Plain White T's, Edward Wong, David Turnbull, Columbia Revolt, Year of the Lash  and Jheri Curls Have improved, but still needs a lot of help. -- Rayqayza Dialga Weird 2210   16:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

PHASE 2 Thomas Latimer   Matt Bai are better articles now, because of wikipedians like you who have improved articles. -Stubs-

David Garrow Nell Irvin Painter

Hans Raastad-- an article I created