User talk:Fvasconcellos/Archive 23

Vandalism
Hi, I caught an instance of vandalism and was looking for someone involved in dealing with it. I figured the "vomiting" article was a natural place to look and your name appeared in the article-history. Should I simply report it to an admin, or send the vandal a warning note on his/her talk page, or (?) ? I'll watch here, or you can respond on my talk. Thanks. Hamamelis (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, here is a link to the vandalism in question.


 * This type of vandalism is pretty easy to deal with. Revert it and leave a warning at the user's Talk page. If vandalism persists, you can report it at WP:AIV.


 * Have you considered getting Twinkle? It's very easy to use, and makes these tasks semi-automatic. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask! Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. When I get my own system in about a month I'll likely make use of Twinkle. Hamamelis (talk) 13:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Benzos
Hi FV, I am contacting you as was suggested by an Colin with regard to a dispute on the benzodiazepine page. I believe that Sceptical Chymist was being intentionally disruptive and frivilous etc and I now believe that he is trying to sabotage the featured article. Admittedly I lost my cool and perhaps resorted to what might be borderline personal attacks but from my point of view it was personal defense but I went about it the wrong way. I don't know how to deal with this situation as I feel just sitting back might allow the FA review to be sabotaged but defending myself is going to be me losing my cool. So I think Colin's advice to contact yourself is the best way forward. I probably also jumped the gun as I am in an ArbCom regarding an editor by the name of scuro and had issues with Mwalla who got banned who did similar things eg taking refs out of context, cutting words out of edits and then starting pointless debates so I am sensitive to that kind of disruption at the moment. Anyway if you have the time could you read and review the benzodiazepine talk page and then after that read and review the featured article review I would much appreciate it. This is not about content dispute but about disruptive behaviour and whether or not it is happening and how do I resolve it?-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  13:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Admittedly this has only been going on for a few days but as featured article reviews only last a week or 2 also probably made me jump the gun and go on the defensive but I do believe something needs doing but I just don't know what.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  13:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ouch. I'm sorry I couldn't get to this sooner. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 11:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi FV,

I have tried to resolve the dispute but Sceptical Chymist on his talk page but it failed. He ignors my complaints which I would like to resolve and then twists things to say that my complaints with him are about style and grammar tweaks or some nonsense and then cites other reviewers who agree about style and grammar as evidence that he is right and my complaints are groundless. My issues are that he misrepresents refs to make claims about the article, that he dishonestly misrepresents things that I have said and so forth. I want to address the articlle content, not address correcting lies and deceit of a review, a reviewer who only beccame a reviewer after falling out with me to annoy me. I am completely open to resolving the issues. I would like to for example come to an agreement where he stops being dishonest about things I said, or about ref content and I agree to keep my cool, then shake hands type of thing and move on but this is impossible when any attempt to resolve the dispute is met with more twisting and dishonesty and refusal to address the dispute issues. Thank you for your time.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  16:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

See like now I am having to address more dishonesty to you rather than the actual dispute. This is why it is so frustrating. Thank you for listening.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  16:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I've reviewed The Sceptical Chymist's recent edits to the article and found nothing the matter. In fact, they were all improvements, apart from removing the "Veterinary use" section, which was a bit drastic despite the sourcing issues (I'll rewrite it shortly from better sources). My main recommendation now, which I won't add to the FAC page as it would be redundant, is check your sources and improve them wherever possible. I was unpleasantly surprised by the paucity of citations to good, general-purpose textbooks (about a dozen if I counted correctly), for instance.
 * By the way, for future reference: an excellent general-purpose source for veterinary information is the Merck Veterinary Manual, which is freely available online. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 03:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Drug categorization: consensus sought

 * Should the 2nd, 3rd and 4th levels of the Category:Drugs by target organ system mirror the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System exactly, or be consolidated when possible?


 * Please read the more thorough description of this issue at WT:PHARM:CAT and post your comments there. You're comments would be much appreciated! Thanks. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for May 2009
SoxBot (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

ATCvet
Since no one hears me on WT:PHARM, I try and ask you directly: Could you implement the following code into drugbox?

(If you know a better way to write this, you're welcome of course.) Many thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 17:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Ouch. I may be an admin, but I have little knowledge of advanced template syntax. Is it working? :) If it's working, I'll add it! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Should be. See User:Anypodetos. Feel free to change the parameters there to see what happens. If I messed something up, everlasting shame will have come over me. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Anytime. When you do screw up eventually, the village stocks are only a click away... :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect structure for R207910, which may become an important anti-tubercular?
Fv, please see my comments at Talk:R207910 where I believe your structure is incorrect, possibly due to mis-indexing at PubChem. Lanulos (talk) 04:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

For whatever reason
For whatever reason you made this edit to your user page...

--ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll take all three... :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey again
Hi Fva! Did you ever hear back from the Brazilian Navy regarding the name of BRAZILIAN BATTLESHIP Minas Geraes? Cheers, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  02:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't. I've mailed them twice to no avail. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh well then. It's not a big deal, and BRAZILIAN BATTLESHIP Minas Gerais redirects to it anyways. Thanks! I'll be nomming it again at FAC again soon; if you could provide it, your help would be greatly appreciated again. — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  02:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Belated reply regarding Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907
Hi Fvasconcellos,

I have finally completed addressing your points and have replied to them on the talk page, threaded with yours. Thank you again for your suggestions, as well as all your help, starting from the original event, and for your overall support. Crum375 (talk) 20:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Anytime :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to bug you again, but I am thinking of taking this article to FAC. When you have a chance, would you mind looking at it again to see if there are any glaring deficiencies you can spot? Thanks in

advance, Crum375 (talk) 02:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No bother at all. I'll have another look later. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Please let me know when/if you think it's ready for FAC. Crum375 (talk) 03:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I started working on missing translations of news titles inside citations, but discovered that square brackets leave an ugly residue, while round ones may not be optimal, since they clash visually with the "language" ones. Would it be acceptable to just use the English version as title? Crum375 (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Afraid not. You can use HTML entities for the brackets (&amp;#91; for left and &amp;#93; for right), that'll take care of it. Here's an example. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I plan to do the translation first in regular square parens, and then switch them to the HTML ones. I dare say this is not very user friendly; I think there should be an addition to cite news to allow a foreign title plus a translation as parameters (e.g. title and trans_title). Thanks for the help and info. Crum375 (talk) 00:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I ended up adding a new translation parameter to the cite news template myself, and it seems to work. You can check it yourself with your example. I'll complete switching all the rest of the refs if the new feature "sticks". Crum375 (talk) 05:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, that's a good idea. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

re Lonchocarpus laxiflorus
Thanks for the skeletal formula image on Lonchocarpus laxiflorus. I really didn't expect anyone else to take any note of the article, so it was especially pleasant to see such a constructive addition. Cheers, BanyanTree 04:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I found the article while scanning the New chemistry articles log and thought it could use some illustration. Thank you, by the way—one of the sources you used in this article just came in very handy for another one :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 05:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

RfC on Joseph Priestley lead image alignment
A RfC has been opened to discuss the issue of alignment of the lead image on the Joseph Priestley article. Because you have previously commented or been involved with this issue at Featured article candidates/Joseph Priestley, your input is requested. Please stop by Talk:Joseph Priestley and leave any feedback you may have. Thank you. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow.
 * As I said during FAC, the portrait is right-facing and Priestley is "looking" outwards. Take from that what you will; after reading what is possibly the lamest RfC I've ever come across (no offense), I have abandoned any previous opinion I had on the matter and am loathe to comment over there. I wouldn't even know where to comment, actually. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

We often don't thank each other enough for the little things...
...so thanks for this. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 02:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

List of skin-related conditions nominated as featured list candidate
I have continued to work on the list of skin-related conditions, and recently nominated it for FL status. If available, your comments would be greatly appreciated at the nomination page. Regardless, thank you again for your work on wikipedia. ---kilbad (talk) 06:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not really familiar with the FLC process; it's been a long time since I last reviewed a candidate. I'll read up on the criteria and leave my comments :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
for removing vandalism from my talk page. Griffinofwales (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Anytime :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Ofloxacin
Responded to your concerns on my talk page. When you get a chance take a look and we will rewrite it from there. Thanks for taking the time to comment as well as working with me to get it right. Davidtfull (talk) 04:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Batman supporting characters
In the current comics, Dick Grayson IS the new Batman. He is not Nightwing, please do not change his entry on the page from Batman to Nightwing. --CmdrClow (talk) 08:36, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that was not supported by the references or the surrounding content. I apologize if it wasn't inaccurate, but it certainly seemed to be. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 11:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The statement contained a footnote sourcing Batman #687 as the issue where Grayson takes up the mantle. When a statement is sourced, please do not modify it unless you believe the source itself to be fallacious. --CmdrClow (talk) 22:54, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I'll certainly pay closer attention in future. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:57, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for June 2009
SoxBot (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

What a pity
What a pity I'll have to revert that. Sorry to bother you, but I just had to show somebody... Cheers --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * What a pity indeed :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

thanks and a request
Hi, I wanted to say a belated thank-you for adding the structure of ascocorynin to the Ascocoryne sarcoides article; it was much appreciated. I added a new article to the GAN waiting list and was wondering if you had time to draw the structure of polyozellin, an interesting compound with antitumor and other effects. Thanks for your efforts, Sasata (talk) 05:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure! :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 10:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done. I can add one for kynapcin-24 as well if you'd like. Good luck on GAN! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I don't know if you collect these things or not, but I just wanted to say thanks for helping me with those darned citations for footnotes. I couldn't make heads or tails of the example on that footnotes page, but your example in the article was a big help.


 * Hey, thanks! I'm really glad I could help. Good luck with FAC, the article is in great shape. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The fun thing is that each game's infobox contains a spot for the national anthem performance. Since so many games have famous performers sing or play the anthem, it makes sense to include them. And I have to say that Sandoval's rendition was one of the best I've heard. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

...be it
You bet - thank you for asking. (Is a FAC submission on the works?) I'll likely have some questions for you... Outriggr (talk) 05:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Alt text
Fvasconcellos,

I saw a negative comment you made about alt text. I've not been able to keep up with WP recently but I'm interested to know what your negative opinions are. Looking at your current project I can see there may be issues writing useful alt text for chemical structures, 3d molecules and diagrams. Have you considered asking Eubulides to help write the alt text for that article, as he is the editor championing changes to FAC, and seems willing to test any arguments with examples of difficulties overcome. Perhaps this will show there are good exemptions, or perhaps he will work some magic and show that there does exist useful alt text for those kinds of image. Colin°Talk 21:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey Colin (long time, no see ;),
 * Most or all of my negative opinions have been mentioned here: possibility of veering into OR, difficulty drawing the line on detail and what exactly is "useful", possible controversy when people start disagreeing on descriptions... How would you render alt text for Harry Beck's landmark map of the London Underground, for instance? Don't get me wrong, I do think it is useful. I had a tast of what quite a few of our readers must go through, being unable to see images; we had server trouble these past few days, and image rendering was severely affected. I'll leave Eubulides a note asking him to go over my attempts at Linezolid; I'm sure he'll have good suggestions. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. Would you care to help me with Retigabine once I've taken this through FAC? I've had a rough outline of an article in my personal sandbox for a while, and there are some pretty good sources available. Best as always, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * At the moment I'm overloaded with real-life work/family issues. I'd love to help, of course, but just don't know when I'll have the time just now. Colin°Talk 22:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Eubulides (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The alt text you added to Linezolid is first-rate, thanks! I did only one minor tweak. However, the first four images still lack alt text. For the infobox, I made an editprotected request for the obvious patch; once that's applied you can steal the alt text from Template:Drugbox/testcases (in this case, there's no need for a lot of detail, since the drugbox already has the IUPAC name). The double image stack call needs two alt-text arguments (I recently added support for that template).
 * OK, all done (drugbox support included). Thank you for the compliment; I only wish "producing" alt text wasn't this hard.
 * I attempted to add alt text for Beck's map; whaddya think?
 * I'm a big, big believer in picture-worth-a-thousand-words, to the point where I am completely unable to find pure descriptions of information graphics meaningful. Maybe it's just a matter of habit. But you did a good job.
 * I really noticed that server trouble too! Hope it's over.
 * Certainly appears to be. I'm compelled to say... thanks for being a nice guy about this :) I hope I'll see you at FAC soon. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Bugs in drugbox
Hi Fv! There seem to be bugs in the implementation of antimony and bismuth. See Sodium stibogluconate and Glycobiarsol. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Got them—try purging your cache if it's still not rendering properly. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. My next problem: what's wrong with Antimony pentasulfide? --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 17:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Drugbox doesnt' support all inorganic compounds; I believe it requires C, H, O or N in the formula or it won't display (probably because it uses OrganicBox). can probably give you a proper answer, though. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks – I've asked him. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 09:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see it's all sorted now. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:27, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

SVGs
Thanks man! Your SVGs are famous by the way, I see them at almost every GI conference in some talk about Crohn's! Best regards -- Samir 03:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Numbers as figures
Fvasconcellos, as per your edit to Cromoglicic acid, Science and JAMA style is to use numerals most of the time.

In Wikipedia terms, this could be justified by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Numbers_as_figures_or_words "Comparable quantities".

If you like it that way, I'll leave it in, but that's why I do it. --Nbauman (talk) 17:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, there was no other quantity with which to compare "four" (e.g. "given 4 times daily, while [...] is given 2 times"), so that's why I changed it. If you'd rather change back, feel free to. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Reglan & Metoclopramide
Hi there. You've twice deleted the link to my blog, DangerousDrugs.us. I'm hoping I can persuade you that the site is reliable enough to keep listed. The documents I'm reproducing there, in html and in PDF, come from actual filed lawsuits over Reglan. For example, I linked to an expert witness report from one lawsuit that listed in great detail the regulatory history of Metoclopramide, its association with Tardive Dyskinesia, and other very pertinent information. I saw that reliability is a concern of yours. Any expert testimony that I post made it through a Daubert challenge, meaning that at least one judge found it sufficiently reliable to be used in court. These reports are not just guesses made by unqualified people.

These reports also aren't available to the general public. It's a fair estimate that these reports and depositions cost $10,000 or more to the attorney who retained that expert. They represent hundreds of hours of hard work by people with top-notch credentials, and focus in on specific issues that would be very relevant to a Wikipedia reader looking up Metoclopramide or Tardive Dyskinesia, for example. Assume for instance that someone has developed a movement disorder and has been taking Metoclopramide for a year or more. He or she would probably like to see the expert reports from both sides (which I reproduce) which discuss in great detail whether and how Metoclopramide causes Tardive Dyskinesia. A very pertinent example is a motion I produced filed by one of the makers of Metoclopramide in which they admit that the drug not only causes TD in general, but caused it for that specific plaintiff. Now, that's not the sort of document the manufacturer is going to put on their web site, but the public has a right to know that it exists. So too does the public have a right to know what scientists are saying in court, under oath, about the safety and efficacy of prescription drugs.

I hope you'll take another look at the documents that I'm posting at my site, and reconsider whether the literally hundreds of pages of expert scientific data about Metoclopramide - information that isn't freely available anywhere else justifies a link to my site from the Reglan and Metoclopramide page. If you'd like to contact me privately to address any further concerns you have, I'd welcome the chance to chat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.156.95.212 (talk) 01:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Please have a look at Verifiability, one of our core policies, and particulaly its section on self-published sources: blogs are rarely, if ever, considered acceptable sources for use in Wikipedia. While I am in no way questioning the reliability of the documents you are posting, they are primary sources, which are also not preferred for use in Wikipedia We prefer secondary sources whenever possible; a feature story in a respected newspaper or newsmagazine, for instance, is much better than a collection of court documents.
 * Tardive dyskinesia is a very well-established and very well-known adverse effect of long-term use of dopamine antagonists, particularly those acting on the D2 receptor, such as metoclopramide; I'm sorry, but this isn't exactly breaking news, regardless of whether the people affected are only starting to seek legal action now. The Metoclopramide article already mentions tardive dyskinesia (and rightly so, even if it is a brief mention). Even if the documents you are posting were being made available through a medium considered "reliable" for Wikipedia purposes, I really don't see the need for them to be mentioned. I am quite sure you will disagree, however; perhaps you would like to post a note at Talk:Metoclopramide requesting the opinions of other editors? Best wishes, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the cordial response. The reason I think that the documents should be mentioned here is because that most of the medical journals that have explained how Metoclopramide causes TD are subscription-only, or otherwise not generally available. The documents I've posted and will continue to post are some of the best free documents that explain the scientific mechanisms involved. What I'm going to suggest at the Metoclopramide talk page is a new section regarding the legal actions over the drug. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.156.95.212 (talk) 02:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thank you! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Write articles on a netbook?
I tried! Can I blame the computer for causing me to subsequently screw up the redirects? :) Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Computers don't screw up redirects, Wikipedians screw up redirects. ;) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:46, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations and good luck
Congratulations on linezolid becoming FA, and I hope the personal circumstances sort themselves out. JFW | T@lk  10:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I want to second the congratulations. Great work! ---kilbad (talk) 11:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on the article! My best wishes to you and your family at this difficult time. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  09:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, everyone—for your well wishes, for supporting the article and for your excellent reviews. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Your note
Hi Fvasconcellos, unless you know something I don't, the Gol article is still in FAC, and you are more than welcome to critique it. I hope it makes it &mdash; I am currently waiting for feedback from Laser brain. Crum375 (talk) 20:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Say what? There must be something wrong with the assessment script I use—either that, or sleep deprivation... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope your script is fine, but reporting future events. In that case, I can think of other ways to use it... Crum375 (talk) 00:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)