User talk:Fvasconcellos/Archive 19

Moving Central American departments
I reported you for supporting, like me, a common naming scheme for country subdivision articles. TopoCode (talk) 04:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fv, what are you doing in Honduras, ha? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, isn't that special. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:14, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Pharma stubs
Since my main occupation here seems to be the creation of "this drug is in Phase III" stubs, and since you kindly invited me to ask questions, here are some: Thanks for your help --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Should I create articles about drugs if their development was terminated, if the mechanism is somehow interesting? (e.g. Tolevamer, a toxin binding polymer which was tested vs vancomycin for Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea:, )
 * Should I add drug navigation boxes to my stubs? If yes, should I add my drugs to the navboxes? (But the boxes will soon get crowded if everyone puts Phase III drugs there)


 * Muchas gracias! Created tolevamer now, and optimistically rated it as Start. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 15:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Anytime :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Protected Miley Cyrus discussion Page
What are you doing protecting the Miley Cyrus discussion page? Are you crazy? The George W. Bush discussion page gets more vandalism and yet it can be edited. I demand that you unlock the Miley Cyrus discussion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.139.248 (talk) 12:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
Wow... thanks for moving that back to my talk page... I have no clue how that happened. :) Anyways, thanks and have a great day!   - Jameson L. Tai   talk  ♦  contribs  19:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Exenatide
I've returned to the byetta pages and checked your (mostly sensible) changes. I added well-sourced information and did not use the second person (my professional writing style.) I have not changed the scientific material (although it should be rewritten for clarity) but moved it lower in the page. I moved information understandable to lay people (including patients) up on the page. I believe those looking for detailed scientific information can scroll down, while lay people may leave discouraged if they read first the dense technical information. If you think it inappropriate to put the lay material first, let's take it to the mailing list and get more opinions. I think it's a pretty good idea, reflecting what I know of web site usability. I disagree with your changing under the skin of the abdomen, thigh, or arm, because I prefer using language understandable for lay people (and that's what subcutaneous means.) I didn't change it back however (minor issue,) but hope you will choose to do so when you get a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveBurstein (talk • contribs) 21:15, 20 September 2008
 * Replied over at your Talk page. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I accidentally changed it by mistake somehow; the version I was editing was minus the (under the skin) on my screen. I'll go back and add cutaneous. When I have time, I will probably return and add material about the off-label use for weight loss, which is becoming common (and in fact was recommended for that by a physician I trust. But I didn't want to do that without careful ersearch and sourcing. Thanks for the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveBurstein (talk • contribs) 21:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC) There's plenty of clinical literature that weight loss is a common "side effect" of the drug, including a manufacturer funded study that the loss continues for two years, longer than typical tests for weight loss. Why use exanatide for weight loss? Because it often works, and some people will do anything to lose weight. The natural patient to give it to has high blood sugar and is overweight, with insurance companies over here unlikely to approve the expensive drug without the finding of high sugar. So the main off label use is for patients with mild high sugar who don't need the drug. For example, one doctor I know stabilizes patients on Metformin and if they are overweight adds exanatide even if the Metformin has reduced their A1c sufficiently. "It will be good for them to lose weight," he seems to think. One person I know considered drinking sugared soda before a blood test so that she good get approved for the drug, because she was hopeful for weight loss. There's plausible science, and many anecdotes on the web suggest it's common. That's one reason I came to edit this, to make sure the warnings are prominent. db   —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveBurstein (talk • contribs) 01:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

ChemSpiderIDs into Drugboxes
There has been a discussion going on at the ChemBox page ChemSpider IDs in Drugboxes. There are over 300 ChemBoxes linked up now I believe and CSIDs are being fed into DrugBoxes but they are not visible since they are not in the DrugBox template. Who would need to approve the possibility of putting CSIDs into the Drugbox to accompany PubChem, Drugbank and MeSH IDs? Thanks --ChemSpiderMan (talk) 03:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm a proponent of this, the Chemspider link has quite a few predicted properties that may be useful in a pharmacological sense. Several of the common chemicals that have chemboxes have the IDs in them, and more are being added on a regular basis. I think if we were to add CSIDs to drug boxes users could view the chemical properties of a drug and perhaps get a better understanding of the relationship between structure and activity. Casforty (talk) 13:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This is pretty uncontroversial, particularly if it has already been implemented in Chembox new; has it? I'll ask, the (un)official maintainer of Drugbox, to work it in. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Has it already been added to Chembox new - if so where (i.e. help please, I can't see any edit for this recently) ? Might as well get the parameter name, shown left-hand header and linking style coordinated... As far as I can quickly tell, a link is to http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.XXXX.html where XXXX is the ChemSpider identifier - eg http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.1906.html for paracetamol. David Ruben Talk 17:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A quick look at the history shows it hasn't been added to Chembox new yet. The link format is exactly as you describe; see for instance http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.2425.html (verapamil).
 * A  parameter has already been added by Casforty to plenty of drugboxes, so perhaps that should be its title? Just "ChemSpider" would be more intuitive, but more trouble as well (i.e. no backwards compatibility :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Chembox is heavily nested. See Template:Chembox ChemSpiderID and. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A-ha! Mystery solved :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Given though that ChemSpider's host has himself expressed doubts "I am not sure that they belong on an encyclopedic article", I think discussion needs be concluded first at WT:PHARM, particularly given Casforty's multiple additions before even any discussion at template talk:drugbox itself (I've just raised a heads-up to...) or agreement at WT:PHARM :-) I've no real opinion on this question, but seems no agreement yet concluded, but I can happily add if consensus (coding simple enough to cross over) David Ruben Talk 01:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

hi
You're right. There is a max length of hook and yours was well within it. However I try to squeeze as many good hooks as possible into a limited space. I ask my self,, is it important that the 1500 was "at its height" or will people not read it because he was the deputy editor rather than the editor. This detail can be found in the article and I hope that most of the time I keep the hook but gain some space ... possibly for your next hook to be squeezed onto the page?. Hope that helps Victuallers (talk) 09:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin
FYI, I've got some new issues regarding the Palin image at the Graphics Lab. See you there, I hope.Ferrylodge (talk) 04:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Goodone121
This user, on expiry of his block, returned to the same behaviour. Wondering if you could have a look... JFW | T@lk  05:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like he was indefblocked. Leevanjackson has asked for reduction of the block on AN/I, but I'm not sure it would be appropriate; Goodone did make productive edits after my block expired, but it appears he won't give up on Talk:Huntington's disease until he gets a GAR—never mind that the article wasn't listed in the first place. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin Pic
Hi, After taking into consideration the feedback from other editors regarding the Carson City image at Sarah Palin, I have created a new version with the intent of pleasing those who have contributed to the discussions. The quality of the image has been significantly improved. I would appreciate your opinion here: []. Thanks, IP75 75.25.28.167 (talk) 21:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for September 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 20:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

RFC on WT:PHARM
I'd really appreciate your idea, unless you are still swamped with work... --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That acronym in your message heading just gave me a minor arrhythmia. I forget that not every request for comment is a Request for Comment... :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Dwayne Johnson
Yes, that's what I meant. Fixed now -- thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Gyn Talk (Visual Fiction)
Hello, Fvasconcellos.

Thank you for your notes stating that the debate about the deletion of the Gyn Talk (Visual Fiction) article has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions and the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. However, I believe that a Sociology-related deletion discussion is more appropriate than a Medicine-related deletion discussion because the Gyn Talk (Visual Fiction) article draws upon knowledge as published in the field of sociology about the field of medicine. (Please read the notes to the Gyn Talk (Visual Fiction) article.) If you are not interested in including the article in a Sociology-related deletion discussion, please inform me how I can make this inclusion myself because I am interested in maintaining a neutral point of view in deletion discussions about Gyn Talk (Visual Fiction), which has yet to occur, and the medical establishment’s presence on Wikipedia cannot be assumed to be a neutral place for such a discussion due to the fact that this particular discussion involves, among a range of topics, arguments concerning social inequities in the history of the practice of medicine. Thank you very much for your understanding. Joseph Levi (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Pedido
Prezado/a colega, vi que o senhor/a senhora é brasileiro/a ou, pelo menos, vive no Brasil. Sou professor de Português. Vivo nos EU mas agora encontro-me em Hong-Kong na Universidade de Hong-Kong e sou professor de Português assim como Director do Programa de Línguas Estrangeiras. Gosto imenso do meu trabalho. Olhe, tenho muito respeito pelo seu trabalho assim como pelo seu cargo dentro da Wikipédia. Só lhe peço que leia as opiniões dos editores assim como, e mormente, as minhas respostas. Acho que até agora estas pessoas que votaram contra o artigo só o fizeram baseando-se no seu prejuízo e na sua ideia pré-estabelecida. Nem sequer leram as minhas respostas. Portanto, não acho esta uma resolução muito equilibrada. A decisão já parece ser um facto e não uma discussão/um debate, como deveria ser, segundo as regras da Wikipédia. Parece-me estranho que a maioria destes editores se encontre constituída por pessoas ligadas ao campo científico ou com um forte interesse nele. Será esta uma maneira para silenciar o artigo e o seu conteúdo? Ao escrevê-lo segui os parâmetros estabelecidos pela Wikipédia assim como pelo mundo académico. Sempre me baseei em factos, nunca em opiniões pessoais. A bibliografia reflecte o meu trabalho. Acho injusto e desnecessário este tipo de ataque. Caro/a colega, apelo à sua sensatez, pois vi a sua página pessoal e reparei que deve ser uma pessoa muito qualificada naquilo que faz. Obrigado por ter-me ouvido. Este é só um desabafo. Mudando de assunto, gostei imenso do seu trabalho com as bandeiras. O/a colega desenho-as? O/a senhor/a teria tempo e disponibilidade para fazer uma bandeira imaginária contendo todas as bandeiras das lusofonia (incluindo os Açores, a Madeira e Macau) para os nossos alunos aqui? Se estiver interessado/a, depois poderemos falar dos detalhes. Mais uma vez, obrigado por ter-me ouvido e espero, vivamente, que pelo menos o/a senhor/a me possa dar o tempo e a oportunidade de ler aquilo que eu escrevi em resposta às acusações que os editores fizeram, alguns até contra a minha pessoa, outros contra o artigo em si, nomeadamente, o seu conteúdo. Obrigado. Joseph Levi (talk) 13:13, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

BioAustralis: too brutal, isn't it?
I am not content with so rapid removal of BioAustralis. Their company page was legitimate, I think, though their advertisments were of course very rude misuse uf Wikipedia, and I was the first to object their links. Lushi (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I have no idea which article you're talking about. There is no record of a BioAustralis article ever having been created or deleted. What was the article called? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

--- I wrote to you because you put a relevant comment on the User_talk:Phillipajane

Well, it is Bioaustralis, not BioAustralis, the misspelling is because so they call themselves,BioAustralis.

please look at User_talk:Phillipajane. it clearly says:

A page you created, Bioaustralis, has been tagged for deletion, ....

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. ukexpat (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC) and if you attempt to create Bioaustralis you get this: Notice: You are re-creating a page that was deleted. ...   * 02:34, 3 October 2008 Orangemike

Lushi (talk) 07:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the article really didn't meet our guideline on the notability of companies. One could argue that "specializes in the isolation and fermentation of rare metabolites" is a reasonable indication of why the company is noteworthy, which might have saved the article from speedy deletion, but there's no way it would have survived an AfD discussion.
 * That doesn't mean you can't recreate it; if you do recreate it, it won't necessarily be deleted again either. If BioAustralis meets our notability guideline and the article manages to demonstrate this, there's no reason for it to be deleted again. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Sure I shall learn the AfD discussion. I wish to emphasize that I am not going to recreate that article. On the contrary, I think they deserve to be punished for the misuse of Wikipedia and I was the first to protest their advertisement links. But I think we must or may be more liberal with companies or even individuals inclusions. Lushi (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Rotigotine
Hi Fvasconcellos. I noticed the structure you put on Commons for this compound does not specify the enantiomer. This compound is sold as the (6S) enantiomer with structure as below



...do you think it would be better to have this structure on the article? Meodipt (talk) 04:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. There have been some SVG font rendering issues since a Mediawiki bug was fixed on Monday, so I may not be creating any new SVGs or updating old ones for quite a while. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 11:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

This is why...
Remember the page Virginia Tech massacre? I was trying to revert the IP vandal's edits, but I had to copy+paste each section and then remove the spaces, dashes, etc... It would help me a lot if I could have rollback. Often, I've experienced this problem when trying to use the "Undo" feature. Throughout my contributions, I have often reverted vandalism. Though I may not have been here for a long time, I have the experience via editing at different Wikias (namely http://halo.wikia.com/Help:Rollback). Please consider this. ImperatorExercitus (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I just noticed your message about the revert...Thanks! Cheers. ImperatorExercitus (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Categorisation of dermatology articles on Wikipedia, input wanted
Hey. has asked me to ask around a few people to get their opinions on the current catagorisation tree proposed at this discussion, as he seems rather eager to get going with the work but would like a few more opinions. Any chance you could have a quick look and post your thoughts? Cheers. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 15:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look tomorrow, though this is pretty much outside my area of expertise. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Remogliflozin structure
Thanks, you seem to notice everything around here, despite your being swamped with work :-) --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Take a look
at 66.251.199.141. They seem to use only refs by "Giannini et al" exclusively and apply them wherever they see fit in 100s of articles, also where they make absolutely no sense. I am not convinced that these refs are reflecting the statements. I am not even sure if the refs are real, some were clearly invented. These 66.251.199.141 are best case "Gianninists" who make a sport of copying exclusively from Giannini, or they are vandals. The refs are very hard to verify. I am afraid they swamp WP with disinformation, like Goodson did, but mix it with real info. A hard to detect vandalism 70.137.138.233 (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 66.251.'s contributions appear verifiable—see e.g. (books published),  (Red Orc's Rage), and a brief biography of Giannini in PMID 10821156. It may very well be someone connected to Giannini or even the man himself, but I can't really see any evidence of wrongdoing so far. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:39, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Several contributions were clearly bogus and out of place, others invented and not verifiable. See a contribution, "Phencyclidine", where allegedly the blood is acidified by IM (!) injection of Vitamin C. Clearly you cannot inject the amount of Vitamin C into a muscle, which would be reqd. I can point you to others. Like with Goodson it is a mixture of real and bogus material. Another one, where a Giannini-Drugs of Abuse ref was added to all Beer articles. (Porter, Ale, etc.) Looks like contribs of somebody who is obsessed with the idea that Beer is a drug of abuse. The point is in some cases the refs exist, but don't say that. In others the refs don't exist. Its vandalism, very sneaky. In several cases this has been proven, the ref didn't say a word about what was claimed. Like with Goodson, where suddenly phenethylline became temazepam. It is hard to spot w.o. really reading the refs. I think they target psychoactives articles for sabotage, including beer. Religious teetotalers maybe, the US is a strange country now. 70.137.138.233 (talk) 22:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

See here

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ALager&diff=242825683&oldid=238175811

70.137.138.233 (talk) 03:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll try to keep an eye on his/her contributions, but without access to the original references, this is just, well, "acting fishy"; they seem to have drifted away from psychoactives at the moment (no pun intended). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 10:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for October 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 02:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Gianninists
see her a ref which has been used over and over

http://www.aafp.org/afp/20000501/2763.html It states the algorithm for diagnosis wrong.

Opiate intoxication gives constricted pupils. Opiate withdrawal gives dilated pupils. The algorithm states the other way around.

The tree has no entry (psychotic, constricted pupils).

It also has no entry for sober and healthy. So the outcome is always some intoxication or withdrawal. There are more factual inaccuracies.

There is no "sufrol"

There is no "mesipramine", closest match is desipramine, and this is not a mu-agonist, but NE/Serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

Borneol has not been described.

The drugs of abuse do not necessarily cause the release of a neurotransmitter, they may block the receptor site or they may inhibit reuptake, or they may act instead of a neurotransmitter.

The sigma-site is missing.

Anticholinergic drugs of abuse are antimuscarinics, not antinicotinic.

Dissociative drugs: Dopamine release is not a direct effect. Other neurotransmitter effects are also indirect. The action on the sigma-receptor is missing, instead an attempt to decompose the action into multiple receptor actions.

Injection of a gram Vit C IM is a horrible idea. Also the patient may already have acidosis. We could equally well inject HCl, IM, or maybe spider digestive juices.

Table 3: There is no asthmador muscarinic. Locoweed - he probably means Jimson weed, Datura sp., Locoweed is normally something else and blocks ganglioside metabolism if I remember correctly.

Mesipramine = no mu agonist, no such thing. Borneol? Sufrol?

Sedative hypnotics:

temazepam does belong with diazepam, not with flurazepam.

Sedative hypnotic overdose is life-threatening, in particular with barbs, methaqualone, alcohol, he says its not, but he says it is later. Incoherent.

Benzodiazepine intoxication/overdose may require intervention.

To delay treatment of alcohol wd. until gross resting tremor and fever, hallucinations appear is very dangerous. These are signs of delirium tremens.

Stimulants: a combination of desipramine with bromocriptine seems a horrible idea.

Dopamine doesn't cause rigidity, but dopamine depletion does.

Agitation, stiffness, fever sounds like serotonin syndrome, not like a DA effect.

"Colt" is not a street name for beer, but a brand name.

"Night train" is not a street name for wine, but a brand name for cheap fortified wine.

Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous are spiritual and/or Jesus freaks, who first require one to surrender to a higher power. (Well, I already did that, namely Bush, Hitler and Guru Maharadschi)

conclusion: This is probably for the students to find errors? Has also been found on University Dallas Texas site. I will not see a doctor after reading this. I don't want to end up as a guinea pig. What does Igor the hunchback assistant say to that? "Yeees master", but not with me. 70.137.138.233 (talk) 12:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, you've run into a problem then—seemingly inaccurate data published in a reliable, peer-reviewed source. I'll go over any refs still in place and try to verify them with other sources. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "Sufrol" is probably safrole, by the way, and borneol has certainly been described, although I believe it is a GABA agonist and not a serotonin agonist. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I know borneol exists. I have not ever read that somebody abuses borneol, it is in the inhalers for the snuffles and cold. Neither about safrole, well this could be like nutmeg I guess. Nobody would use it twice because of the nasty effect, except maybe some people in prison? You could equally well smoke some old plastic or shoe polish. Well, if beer and wine already have a street name and I have to submit to a higher being... Maybe the higher being is the prison warden? Besides, I always believed that psychiatrists need a shrink themselves. They became psychiatrists in the hope of one day curing themselves. 70.137.138.233 (talk) 02:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

editing FAC pages
Given the somewhat delicate nature of the discussions on the FAC page, probably better if you archive with one of those funny collapsing templates (I will be glad when this one is over!) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Licofelone
Hi Fv! Could you have a look at Licofelone? It was tagged as copyvio by a bot, and the tag was subsequently removed by the author. Besides, is the source up to date? I haven't heard of licofelone for ... years or something, and clinicaltrials.gov doesn't seem to have any studies on it. In case it is really still under development, and you know a new source, just tell me. I'll add a drugbox, draw the structure etc. Cheers --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 16:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Umbrella remixes.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Umbrella remixes.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

SVG formatting
Thanks again for the SVG formatting help. I've now succeeded in running Inkscape on my computer. Importing files I've drawn in ChemDraw seem to work flawlessly. However, once I scale the imported images down to the canvas size, the exported SVG file displays in my browser (Safari) very well, but doesn't seem to render the entire image (only a top portion is displayed). As to my understanding of Inkscape, it is relatively the same over different platforms. Might you know how I can correct this? Much obliged, Elbreapoly (talk) 03:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

SEGRAs
Do you know if there is anything on selective glucocorticoid receptor agonists on WP? I didn't find anything, so I'll have to use inferior sources (Google etc.) I might write a stub about them (in a few weeks time or so) if I find enough reliable material. Cheers --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll add something as soon as I have a bit more time. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 14:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to try out PyMOL, my newest download :-) ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 16:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * More like my fifth or sixth try. I'm very impressed with PyMOL, though. By the way, in case I ever run out of ideas what to contribute: Are such pictures desirable for all drugs, or just for some of the best known, or is it just a whimsical idea to upload them? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 14:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have just read the relevant section of the German policy on chemical structures. Essentially, it says: When creating 3D models, one should not rely on algorithms calculating the optimal conformation since they are unreliable. The page uses Image:Reserpin stick.png as a negative example. Jmol, it seems, has calculated the conformation of the tertiary amine wrong, and besides, the methoxy group (top left) is partially hidden. It is recommended to use only conformations in their absolute energy minimum, or the observed conformation in a crystal, or the active form (on an receptor etc.). The description of the image should include how the structure was calculated (or whether it was taken from a crystal structure). The Germans also oppose calotte models (is that the right word?) for all but the simplest molecules, because they show less structure than stick or ball-and-stick models.
 * Aesthetics seems to be a minor issue, however they talk about avoiding an "inflation of 'colourful pictures'".
 * As you see, I have made about everything wrong with my xipamide model :-| --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 12:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Punnett Square
Thanks for the semi-protection. I think that WP:ROUGH should have a special clause for articles with low but constant IP vandalism that constitutes the majority of all editing. This article is still on the list of things I hope to improve one day. It could *serve* as an introductory article if it didn't presuppose understanding of a whole jumble of technical terms of genetics. And of course it would be improved by references. EdJohnston (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Portuguese Wiki
Fv, would you be interested in adding a Portuguese section to FCDW/OtherWikis? We may eventually prosify it and turn it into a Dispatch, still in the data gathering phase, no deadlines. Best, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 02:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC)