User talk:Berchanhimez/Archive 1

A cup of coffee for you!
Merhaba bende buradayım artık okumaktan yoruldum Abdullah,uludag (talk) 01:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Saludos, Berchan!
Here are a couple of tools and bits of information that might help with your biohealth sourcing: Un placer en "conocerte", Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches explains how to find secondary reviews in Pubmed, and
 * this little gem of a tool will generate a citation template from a PMID number.

Sandboxes
You can create as many "sandboxes" as you need. You can call them things like User:Berchanhimez/sandbox, User:Berchanhimez/sandbox 2, User:Berchanhimez/sandbox 3, etc., or name them by subject: User:Berchanhimez/Thing, User:Berchanhimez/Idea, User:Berchanhimez/Whatever. I've got half a dozen or so, in various states of neglect. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Lente insulin
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Congratulations! Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  17:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks! I moved your comment to my talk page instead of my userpage, I hope that is okay. I've been quite busy since the little burst of time I had to work on the lente insulin and ultralente insulin articles, as well as the little side project of Oral hypoglycemics and insulin analogs but I hope to be able to contribute more in the future. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sturddlefish
Hiya I reviewed your nomination and left some comments about some minor issues at Template:Did you know nominations/Sturddlefish Mujinga (talk) 21:45, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Just a note
Hey, there :) Your responses to the akathisia editor were a bit more aggressive than best; take care to recognize that the learning curve can be steep for newbies, to AGF even when their edits and attitude are terrible, and to avoid being bitey. That not only helps you not get into trouble; it also shows them the way things are intended to work in here. I am constantly amazed that even professionals have a hard time grasping our policies at first.   I see  has dealt with the problem, but I don’t want to see you get into hot water ... we have an entire article to rewrite! Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  12:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I definitely tried to, but they continued to make sweeping changes to the article after being advised to post on the talk page and discuss their removal of sourced information/addition of unsourced information. They finally posted once on the talkpage... but then continued to make the same changes a little while later and never returned to discuss. As I suspected, they are here to push their desired viewpoint and refuse to accept anything other than their viewpoint that "drugs are bad and doctors are horrible people for prescribing these drugs that cause people to feel tortured and commit suicide, and it has no other cause whatsoever" being the article focus. I agree though I may have spent too much time trying and gotten overly frustrated and should've pinged RexxS or another administrator a little sooner - I'll keep it in mind for the future. Most of my editing time now is quite sporadic (definitely not to the amount I had when I did the ATC navboxes a while back) - but I'll try to keep perusing for sources from my resources as I can and at least put them on the talk page. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 14:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for your input on the circ and HIV article. I'm afraid that the "Intactivists" have hacked it and I am getting no support from the editors in terms of keeping it scientific and accurate. Sandy above thinks a 2008 Cochrane review is "old" and "Cochrane reviews are suspect anyway." They know nothing about the subject matter, and add primary opinion sources which are forbidden in Wikipedia medical articles. Petersmillard (talk) 00:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The WikiBlame tool I found isn't working so I can't tell if she did or not, but it doesn't look like she added that statement you pointed out - I don't know who did, but it was highly unlikely her. Sandy is basing her comments on Wikipedia policy - which is that newer sources are better. Part of the reason the "activists" you talk about could add such material is because they were not challenged on it - but it's not necessary to say "sandy doesn't know what she's talking about" and things of that nature. A 2008 Cochrane review is old, especially if we can find newer sources (such as those me and others pointed out on the talk page) - but not everyone has access to the same sources - so pointing out that "it's old and if we can find newer we should" is perfectly valid and useful to WP. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In fact, if you look at her recent edits to the article, she removed the "criticism" section, which is the primary part you have a problem with. I encourage you to stop trying to find fights with her or others and try to work together if possible. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Adding ... Peter, since this is your field, I find it surprising that the article is in such poor shape (along with circumcision). Often we have no editor who knows an area well enough to clean up a poor article, and I am glad Berchan is willing to tackle it. In well sourced, well written, and well maintained articles, it is harder for POV to be pushed. That is not the case here; the “good” text is in as bad shape as the poorly sourced POV. Support from competent editors is best generated in a collaborative editing environment, and perhaps you have gotten some wrong ideas anout how things work on Wikipedia? This is something I have never encountered on Wikipedia, and is contrary to everything Wikipedia is about, where our work is about using and reflecting sources correctly moreso than our off-Wikipedia credentials, and we should avoid biting newcomers. With that kind of environment on a talk page, it is not surprising that competent editors may be reluctant to engage. I suggest that cleaning up the article top to bottom, using recent sources, would be a good way to proceed.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  03:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Cite toolbar
Anyway, I really popped in so Berchan could tell me where to find this cite bar that has had me cleaning up student edits for a decade !! Sandy Georgia (Talk)  03:16, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * RefToolbar/2.0 - you plug in the DOI (how I do it, at least), hit search, and it autofills everything most times. Can't for the life of me figure out how to make it do vauthors tho :( -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 03:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! That page says this toolbar is turned on by default, but I do not have the bar as shown in the image, and cannot find a preference setting where I may have turned it off.  I have an entirely different bar.  But at least now I now I understand why students almost never supply PMIDs (rather DOIs), introduce a dreadful numbering system for refs, and use terrible long strings of first and last author names by default (which creates lines of ref text in edit mode that you have to edit around, making it hard to see the text for the ref). This is depressing if it means that every time I have manually typed out a citation in my non-medical editing, when not citing a PMID, I could have avoided all that typing ... Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  06:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem! Wish I knew how to get it to default to vauthors or even to use vauthors to begin with, would be nice to do it that way for the edit window as you say. I'm not even sure who we would ask about that... -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 06:20, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I found it ... Had to toggle something to get to it. On DOIs, it won’t give a PMID, and on non-journal URLs, it returns really sketchy citations, so I’ll keep doing non-journal citations manually, and using Boghog for journlas. On vauthors, I can almost guarantee that if it could be made to return vauthors, Boghog would have made that happen and gotten it installed, so doubtful that can happen. Instead, like me, he runs around fixing them ;) Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  06:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Depot injection
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Sturddlefish
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Data tables
Can I gently point you to MOS:DTAB and its tutorial MOS:DTT, please? Tables on Wikipedia must have table captions and it's best to mark up headers with their scope. It's all for the benefit of visitors using screen readers. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've fixed this in augmented renal clearance and on User:Berchanhimez/injections and will do my best to remember in the future. If you wouldn't mind taking a peek and letting me know if I've done that right on that article and page I'd appreciate it. Thanks for the information. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 20:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Awesome! You picked that up quickly. You might prefer plainrowheaders for the injections table (just add it in to the class=" ... " list). I've demonstrated for you a technique for ensuring the collapsed table keeps a minimum width equal to the width of the caption. Please revert if you don't like it. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I was about to ask you if there was a way to that, and will try to remember that as well. I will go add plainrowheaders now. Thank you for the assistance :) -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 20:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Re: Minor edits
Thank you for reminding me. I did add a reliable source at the end of the last paragraph in the section on meteorological history. CapeVerdeWave (talk) 06:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Augmented renal clearance
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter – September 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Injector pen
Hi, I promoted your hook to Prep 2, but I just want to note that the proper term for Adherence (medicine) is "patient adherence", not "medication adherence". Please let me know if you have any objections to my changes in the hook and article. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 22:39, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't have any problem with it, but I'm curious as to your reasoning - medication adherence is by definition a subset of "patient adherence", defined as specifically adherence to medical advice regarding proper medication use. It is in fact a redirect page to the general adherence page. Patient adherence as a whole includes the following of advice regarding lifestyle/dietary changes, follow-up appointment scheduling, (re-)testing, etc - which are not affected by injector pens - hence why I went with the more specific term "medication adherence" instead of saying something more wordy such as "patient adherence to their medication regimen". To me, calling it "patient adherence" is slightly misleading, because it does not have any evidence (and likely doesn't) impact adherence to other parts of medical advice - only to medication use. I'm fine with it being changed if you still think it must be, but I figured I'd explain my choice of wording there. Regards, -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 01:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, I was looking at the hook wording: ... that injector pens increase medication adherence in part by reducing the stigma surrounding injecting medication in public?, and aside from the repetition of the word "medication", it seemed to me that the second part of the hook was talking about the patient, not the pen. Knowing people who use injector pens, I felt that patience adherence or, more commonly, patient compliance fits better when you're talking about the patient's role in adhering to a medication protocol, not the pen's role. Yoninah (talk) 10:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I fully understand now - thanks for the further explanation - I see how it's more straightforward to explain it the way you did and avoids the reputation. Thanks for the explanation :) -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Sputnik V scandal
I think Gam-COVID-Vac vaccide have caused such an outcry its material would be enough to create a standalone article.
 * Similar thing have successfully happened to "Whataboutism", they ended up making "And you are lynching Negroes" article to focus on USSR's way of making propaganda rather than the word "Whataboutism". Uchyotka (talk) 20:05, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not too savvy in splitting articles User:Uchyotka - you may want to ask someone else. Personally, I'm not sure valid outcry, even if it's widespread, merits its own article - to me it seems like that may be trying to hide it in a separate article. But again, I'm not the person to ask. Sorry I can't offer a more informed opinion. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 04:27, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, good thing you sounded the point on "trying to hide it in a separate article". Uchyotka (talk) 06:43, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Injector pen
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Gam-COVID-Vac
On my talk page, you said: You undid this edit - while the user was very wordy, they were pointing out a legitimate factual inaccuracy in calling Sputnik a "program". The name Sputnik for the vaccine was taken from the satellite, and I can find no evidence that it ever referred to a "space program". I edited the article to correct this, but there's no need for you to remove legitimate claims of inaccuracy, especially not by referencing policies that don't apply - there was nothing "forummy" about that post.

In fact, while I've been writing this, debating whether to undo or not, someone else has already undone your reversion. Regards, -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:38, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * No, the user trying to play up the word "Sputnik" was using peacock language, WP:PEA. Your edit was correct. I didn't enter that Sputnik information, but objected to "world's first" being used in the vaccine article where it doesn't warrant mentioning at all, imo. Zefr (talk) 18:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yes, I agree. WP:SOFIXIT applies here. Looking at your contributions history, it seems you love to click the undo/revert button instead of fixing problems yourself - even when doing so introduces factual error, as it did here. I agree that it being the world's first artificial earth satellite is unimportant in this article, while it is technically factually true. You could easily have removed those words. And when the user went to the talk page to discuss the issue, you removed their comment under an irrelevant policy.
 * I'm curious why you always move discussions away from your talk page - even when they directly concern you as a person. Is this some sort of attempt by you to obfuscate other people making comments towards you? Why did you feel the need to reply on my page, when I'm discussing you specifically? -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:51, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You raised the issue, so the discussion should be on your talk page, with notification to people you want to join in. A user can do what one wishes on that person's talk page - WP:OWNTALK. I prefer to keep a clean page. Removing a discussion means I've read it. Zefr (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You raised the issue, so the discussion should be on your talk page, with notification to people you want to join in. A user can do what one wishes on that person's talk page - WP:OWNTALK. I prefer to keep a clean page. Removing a discussion means I've read it. Zefr (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Injector pen
The article Injector pen you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Injector pen for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. -- PythonSwarm  T &#124;   C   &#124;   G 04:56, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Noting this as an invalid rejection. Article has been restored to GAN list and is awaiting a reviewer. -- Euryalus (talk) 21:09, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Blood sugar
I wonder whether Blood sugar level should mention that fructose and galactose are also absorbed straight into the blood stream. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:38, 14 September 2020 (UTC)


 * And also that it's really "dextrose". WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:40, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , for virtually all lay intents and purposes "dextrose" and "glucose" are synonymous. The chemical distinction is that the word glucose refers to both levo-rotary and dextro-rotary molecules, whereas dextrose refers solely to dextro-rotary. It is this dextro-rotary form that is used in our bodies, and in all life in fact, whereas the levo-rotary form is mostly synthetic. When we consume natural sugar (ex: from fruits, vegetables, etc) it is virtually all "dextro-rotary" - because life produces and uses virtually only dextro-rotary glucose - thus we basically consume only "dextrose", even if it's not called that.
 * Medicinally, "dextrose" refers to synthetic glucose - i.e. glucose extracted from polymers other than glucose. This glucose is also primarily dextrose, but it is not naturally produced (i.e. it's synthetically produced from starch [a glucose polymer], etc). I think this may be the confusion.. but personally at this point I am unable to comment further on the specific issue here without going into personal attacks. Regardless of synthetic or natural, all glucose/dextrose that is used in medicinal preparations is purified to include the minimal amount of other proteins/molecules as possible. Allergies are to molecules larger than single sugar molecules - not to single sugars. Such a "dextrose allergy" would be incompatible with life -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Imagine a world in which this was all explained and sourced in the mainspace.    Seriously, if one person manages to make it to a talk page with some (any) point confusion, there are probably dozens-to-thousands who have the same confusion but can't figure out how to comment on wiki. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:30, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, does Levulose point to the correct article? I thought it was L-Glucose. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, does Levulose point to the correct article? I thought it was L-Glucose. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:41, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Auxiliary label
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Injector pen
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Injector pen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 07:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

please re-add graphs
you removed all the graphs from the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmacokinetics_of_estradiol page; these were really useful for trans people. please put them back. im still able to see them with the page history but i dont think most people know how to do this. thanks <3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.7.40 (talk) 05:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm sorry that you found these extremely useful, but Wikipedia is not a gallery of images, but an encyclopedia. Having a gallery of literally dozens of graphs is not encyclopedic and thus I removed all of them with no prejudice against readding any particularly notable ones. You may wish to use Wikimedia Commons to create galleries of graphs related to a specific topic if they are under a free license. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 21:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - October 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 00:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for letting me know :), I'll remember that for future occasions. REDMAN 2019  ( talk ) 12:14, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intravenous therapy
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Intravenous therapy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 07:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Suggested content revision for Dextromethadone page
Hi Berchanhimez,

Thank you in advance for your review, and your careful consideration for the Dextromethadone page. I appreciate your work on this subject matter which is very technical to most, but important to many of us in the scientific community.

First, there is a duplicate reference (2 and 6 are the same) and the current citation 5 is redundant. We suggest making the following revisions/clarifications. I included citations through, and will defer to you on what's acceptable, but am confident that this will read more accurately. Please note the referenced footnotes for the Table heading should then change also to be 2 and 3, not 3 and 6.

Dextromethadone (developmental code name REL-1017) is the (S)-enantiomer of methadone.[1] It acts as an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antagonist.[2] The compound also has affinity for opioid receptors,[3] however, according to a recent DEA publication, dextromethadone "lacks significant respiratory depressant action and abuse liability" [4]. Dextromethadone is under development for the treatment of major depressive disorder.[1] There is an asymmetric synthesis available to prepare both dextromethadone (S-(+)-methadone) and levomethadone (R-(−)-methadone).[5]

References 1) https://adisinsight.springer.com/drugs/800038927 2) Gorman AL, Elliott KJ, Inturrisi CE (14 February 1997). "The d- and l-isomers of methadone bind to the non-competitive site on the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor in rat forebrain and spinal cord". Neuroscience Letters. 223 (1): 5–8. doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(97)13391-2. PMID 9058409. 3) Codd EE, Shank RP, Schupsky JJ, Raffa RB (1995). "Serotonin and norepinephrine uptake inhibiting activity of centrally acting analgesics: structural determinants and role in antinociception". J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 274 (3): 1263–70. PMID 7562497. 4) Drug Enforcement Administration. Diversion Control Division. Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section. Methadone. July 2019. 5)Hull JD, Scheinmann F, Turner NJ (March 2003). "Synthesis of optically active methadones, LAAM and bufuralol by lipase-catalysed acylations". Tetrahedron: Asymmetry. 14 (5): 567–576. doi:10.1016/S0957-4166(03)00019-3

In full disclosure, I am an employee of Relmada Therapeutics, Inc.

Sincerely, Daisy Ng-Mak, PhD VP, Value Strategy & Health Economics & Outcomes Research Relmada Therapeutics Incorporation DNg-Mak@Relmada.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.194.156 (talk • contribs)


 * I've cleaned up the references, but I don't feel comfortable making the addition you requested without being able to link to the source myself. I recommend you suggest the changes on the talk page at Talk:Dextromethadone. I'll also reply via email with more information about how to contribute to Wikipedia. Thanks. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:19, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Injector pen
The article Injector pen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Injector pen for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 01:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Homeopathy
Hi Berchanhimez. Thanks for the very thorough and well conducted review of Homeopathy. You did a great job, it was just the type of review I was hoping to get. AIRcorn (talk) 22:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:MED Newsletter - November 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 20:56, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intravenous therapy
The article Intravenous therapy you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Intravenous therapy for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 03:40, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intravenous therapy
The article Intravenous therapy you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Intravenous therapy for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tom (LT) -- Tom (LT) (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your thoughtful review and for working with me to resolve the potential issues - it was a pleasure. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 13:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Intravenous therapy
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Suggested content revision for Dextromethadone page
Hi Berchanhimez,

Appreciate your prompt reviewing our suggestions on the Wikipedia article of Dextromethadone. Apology for leaving out the weblink of the DEA source. In the revised edit, the DEA data and weblink for reference #4 are added. In addition, we identified 2 necessary corrections. o	The date (Oct 2019) was incorrect and unnecessary. Please consider removing “As of October 2019”. o	The synthesis process has been available for a while. Hence we suggest removing “now” from the last sentence.

Dextromethadone (developmental code name REL-1017) is the (S)-enantiomer of methadone.[1] It acts as an N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antagonist.[2] The compound also has affinity for opioid receptors,[3] however, according to a DEA publication, dextromethadone "lacks significant respiratory depressant action and abuse liability" [4]. Dextromethadone is under development for the treatment of major depressive disorder.[1] There is an asymmetric synthesis available to prepare both dextromethadone (S-(+)-methadone) and levomethadone (R-(−)-methadone).[5]

References

1) https://adisinsight.springer.com/drugs/800038927

2) Gorman AL, Elliott KJ, Inturrisi CE (14 February 1997). "The d- and l-isomers of methadone bind to the non-competitive site on the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor in rat forebrain and spinal cord". Neuroscience Letters. 223 (1): 5–8. doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(97)13391-2. PMID 9058409.

3) Codd EE, Shank RP, Schupsky JJ, Raffa RB (1995). "Serotonin and norepinephrine uptake inhibiting activity of centrally acting analgesics: structural determinants and role in antinociception". J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 274 (3): 1263–70. PMID 7562497.

4) Drug Enforcement Administration. Diversion Control Division. Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section. Methadone. July 2019. https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drug_chem_info/methadone/methadone.pdf#search=methadone

5) Hull JD, Scheinmann F, Turner NJ (March 2003). "Synthesis of optically active methadones, LAAM and bufuralol by lipase-catalysed acylations". Tetrahedron: Asymmetry. 14 (5): 567–576. doi:10.1016/S0957-4166(03)00019-3

We hope that you will accept our suggestions.

In full disclosure, I am an employee of Relmada Therapeutics, Inc.

Much appreciated your review.

Best, Daisy Ng-Mak, PhD VP, Value Strategy & HEOR Relmada Therapeutics, Inc. DNg-Mak@Relmada.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dngmak (talk • contribs) 18:04, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intramuscular injection
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Intramuscular injection you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intramuscular injection
The article Intramuscular injection you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Intramuscular injection for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 21:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Intramuscular injection
The article Intramuscular injection you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Intramuscular injection for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 08:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Emily W. Murphy
Hi Berchanhimez, I'm just letting recent contributors to Emily W. Murphy know that I've dropped the protection level to extended confirmed and added a consensus required restriction. Please see my explanation on the talk page for more information. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Epidural administration
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Epidural administration you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 11:40, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Epidural administration
The article Epidural administration you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Epidural administration for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 18:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Epidural administration
The article Epidural administration you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Epidural administration for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bibeyjj -- Bibeyjj (talk) 09:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - December 2020
Ajpolino (talk) 01:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Please don't leave threatening messages on my user page
I have taken the issue to POV noticeboard. No more threats, insults etc. please. Thank you. Huasteca (talk) 21:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)