User talk:Fvasconcellos/Archive 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit count · edit summary usage · blocks · deletions · moves · protections

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

← Archive 8 |

Archive 9

| Archive 10 →

A few questions - hope you can light some insight

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bupropion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1ws1 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 23 August 2007, originally transcluding the bupropion FAC. Redacted by Fvasconcellos (t·c)

Thanks for the update on Treatment of TS; I'm so up-to-my-eyeballs on Asperger syndrome that I forgot ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Love in the Time of Science

Sure. :-) --PEJL 13:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Haven't seen you around in a bit, hope all is well :) ~ Riana ⁂ 13:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

1964 Brazilian coup d'état

Hi. I need your help. I'm going crazy talking to User:Ludovicapipa. It's an WP:OR and WP:NPOV nightmare. I know this isn't your usual thing (I think the only chemical reference in the entire article is to CS gas), but I need an experienced wikipedian who speaks Portuguese to check on our arguments and break with a third opinion. Here's last edit and hers. I've asked several different editors, but everyone's busy working on Brazil. We're running out of options and the odds of finding a mediation committee member who speaks Portuguese to check on sources are slim to none. Thanks!--Dali-Llama 17:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Good job

		The Resilient Barnstar
		Thanks for improving Wikipedia, especially on the Wellbutrin article 1ws1 02:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

re:Anna Svidersky

Nah, it's okay, cos I'm not interested in wheel warring :p Seriously, thanks for taking care of the page. Regards, PeaceNT 04:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

:) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Bruno Maddox at FAC

Hello Fvasconcellos. It's been a while. I hope you are well and enjoying Wikipedia as usual. I was wondering if you would mind reviewing my article on Bruno Maddox. It has received several copyedits so far. It contains all the biographical information I've been able to find on the guy. I'm hoping it will pass at FAC sometime in the next two weeks or so. Anyways, I remember you were very helpful with the Monahan article I was working on a while back. If you have the time I'd appreciate any advice you might have. Take care, BillDeanCarter 15:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyedit and the quick response. I left some comments at FAC and I'm going to work on propping up the pop. sci. section in Genres.-BillDeanCarter 05:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for italicizing The Week. I went to do it myself but you beat me. I'm hoping to figure out the start date and the kind of contributions Maddox makes to The Week. Actually seems like an interesting weekly magazine from what I've read about it.-BillDeanCarter 01:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I sourced it through the Internet Archives. There's more to know but I'm beginning to think he doesn't have bylines at The Week but simply a little editing here and there. If so then the only other information that's needed is his start date for this contributing editorship. If you have an understanding of what SandyGeorgia meant by wikilinking the references would you mind demonstrating what she means on one reference which I will then use to properly format the rest?-BillDeanCarter 01:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will have to carry these formatting fixes over into a few other articles I have worked on.-BillDeanCarter 02:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

PharmacyEagle

Fvasconcellos, thanks for the greeting on my talk page. I am not sure if this is where I am suppose to respond or not, so by all means feel free to delete/move my response if necessary. I noticed you have an interest in pharmacology through your User:Fvasconcellos page. I am a chemist and soon to be PharmD from Tennessee, USA. As you noticed I am new to editing on Wikipedia, but I have already noticed it can be rather additive. I have been scrolling through chemistry and pharmacy stubs to see what I can contribute. By all means any help/suggestions you can offer are much appreciated. PharmacyEagle 13:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PharmacyEagle (talk • contribs) 13:23, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

My Ox. Phos. draft

Just something I knocked up over the weekend. I was going to bug you about making the figures in the Super V Good format after people have finished telling me to change them! Please feel free to comment at the FAC page, I'm dealing with stuff slowly. Tim Vickers 18:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

WikiProject Pharmacology is currently organizing a new Collaboration of the Week program, designed to bring drug and medication related articles up to featured status. We're currently soliciting nominations and/or voting on nominations for the first WP:RxCOTW, to begin on September 5, 2007. Please stop by the Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week page to participate! Thanks! Dr. Cash 17:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Would the manufacturer's recomended dosing be a medical advice?

We are noting standard procedure and backing it up with a reliable reference. If we mention, say, in the myocardial infarction article:

: ”Aspirin should be given at the first signs of a heart attack.”, that is inappropriate, prescriptive, and medical advice. If we say, however:

: ”Aspirin has an antiplatelet effect which inhibits formation of further blood clots that clog arteries. According to the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association, 911 dispatchers may advise people suffering heart attack symptoms to take 160–325 mg of aspirin, preferably a non–enteric-coated formulation and as long as they are not allergic to it, while they await the arrival of EMS.[[74]]”

that’s not medical advice. We are reporting the generally accepted recommendation of a relevant “authority”, and supporting it with a reference. That’s encyclopedic. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 11:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)''

So, would you approve of the following in the depression sub-section of the Bupropion article: "The target dose recommended by the manufacturer for the treatment of clinical depression is 300 mg daily, starting with 150 mg for the first few days. If indicated and directed by physician, the dose may be increased to a maximum of 450 mg daily.[PIreference]"Paul gene 00:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Re. dosage information: I myself don't think it would be medical advice. WP:MEDMOS, however, argues that such information can be construed as such; I can't disagree entirely. As we've both seen, what does and doesn't constitute medical advice is still to be decided :) I am divided in thinking that (1) such information might make the article more comprehensive, particularly if accompanied by relevant, sourced commentary (e.g. higher doses associated with significant increase in adverse effects) and (2) it is localized (approved dosage may vary by country), does not encompass off-label use and, again as mentioned in MEDMOS, may become the subject of vandalism and disputes. The isotretinoin article was recently the object of such a dispute, with one editor adding unsourced claims as to the efficacy of low doses.

Perhaps I shouldn't have been so forceful with my "defense" of the overdose section, particularly as, in the end, Mr Bungle was responsible for improving it and I didn't do much :) I still think it was worth keeping, though. Why do you ask about the dosage info—would you like to add it back? Perhaps it's time we tackle this once and for all and discuss just how appropriate such information is. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I have to admit I was playing a devil's advocate. I think that both overdose and dose information should be there or both should not--and the former is preferable. I looked up the history of the April 2007 MEDMOS discussions, and there actually was no consensus on that point. I'll try to raise the dose info issue again. I hope for your help. Thank youPaul gene 00:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Therapies for multiple sclerosis

I just wanted to thank you for your help these days with the article. Feels good to know you are not the only one that is trying to improve an article.--Garrondo 15:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I know that its not neccesary. I add those links as extra information on a drug from a semi-reliable source that many times has more information than wikipedia. I'll try to look for the references on the trials, but some information about clinical trials is from articles.--Garrondo 16:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you really think its necessary to look for those trials? I mean, the cite 25 is from a journal talks about those trials and says that they were not effective --Garrondo 16:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I have changed it to: "However, no treatment in these trials has been proven definitively to modify the course of the disease". This way the reference is easier to find. I think I´m done with the article for the moment; since I have done all changes that both you and SandyGeorgia have advised me to. These days I will be following the article closely to find if anybody proposes any more changes and after that I will send it to good article review. Thanks for your help. It was the first article I asked for peer-review and I think it has been very useful. It will also be the first article I would try to promote so I hope it gets the good article status. I think its weakest points are that is very specific, and therefore technical; and the imposibility to include images. --Garrondo 17:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

What do you think of the images I have added? I believe they are related enough to the topic. Any other suggestion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garrondo (talk • contribs) 18:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I have nominated the article as a good article candidate. I hope it gets it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garrondo (talk • contribs) 13:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Good luck :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

At the Throne of Judgment

I recently tagged At the Throne of Judgment as recreated but then took it off thinking it might be notable. Now since no further edits have been done, I'm starting to have doubts again. What do you think? Delete? AFD? Prod? -WarthogDemon 01:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll try an keep an eye on the page, but I've asked Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians about it. Thanks! -WarthogDemon 01:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

MOS template

I'm very happy for it to be locked down, as it was, and not as Manderson and co have changed without consensus. Tony 14:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

PS I don't like being referred to as "mature" on my own talk page. Tony 14:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

There's going to be a BIG war unless something is done, and I will not be happy if it's locked down the way these cranks have changed it. It's clearly a premeditated strategy, and partly arises from the current gender-neutral debate at MOS talk. NOT HAPPY. Tony 14:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Huh? That didn't make a whole lot of sense. >Radiant< 14:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

So it's up to you on the timing bit. We won't be friends if this is locked as is. Ever. Tony 14:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Contacting

Yes, I've contacting him now. Discussing things in edit summaries isn't all that practical. Cheers, >Radiant< 14:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm, he appears unwilling to respond to me. Oh well. >Radiant< 14:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Ugh. I tried for a compromise, by just using the wording at Template:Guideline. The clause, " ... they do have occasional exceptions. Ignore any of them rather than being clumsy, inaccurate, or unclear" is *really* horrible and I can understand why Tony1 objects so strongly. I imagine PMAnderson may have added that, as he's been adding that kind of prose throughout MOS lately. That kind of language doesn't provide the kind of clarity we should have on MOS and other templates. Having seen some of this kind of prose PMAnderson has introduced recently, I can understand Tony trying to preserve some semblance of good prose in an important corner of Wiki. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Lung cancer

Hi, Fvasconcellos. I have nominated Lung cancer for "featured article status" here. Thanks for your comments. Axl 17:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week

Aspirin has been selected as this week's Pharmacology Collaboration of the Week! Please help us bring this article up to featured standards during the week. The goal is to nominate this at WP:FAC on September 10, 2007.

Also, please visitWP:RxCOTW to support other articles for the next COTW. Articles that have been nominated thus far include Doxorubicin, Paracetamol (in the lead with 4 support votes so far), Muscle relaxant, Ethanol, and Bufotenin.

In other news:

Bupropion has been promoted to featured status on August 31, 2007.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology main page has been updated and overhauled, to make it easier to find things, as well as to highlight other goals and announcements for the project.

Garrondo is asking for individuals to help review Therapies for multiple sclerosis, as he is considering nominating this article for GA status.

Fvasconcellos notes that discussion is ongoing regarding the current wording of MEDMOS on including dosage information in drug articles. All input is welcome.

Dr. Cash 00:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Still?

Read up on the history before taking sides. >Radiant< 14:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

What I object to is your giving one-sided warnings. I invite you to look through the talk page contributions of your friends for these past two days, and see for yourself whether or not their behavior has been nice and friendly. >Radiant< 14:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Um pequeno favor

FV, I've put in a Request for Comment/User for a Portuguese-speaking user, Ludovicapipa. As I've mentioned before, you're one of the few Portuguese-speaking administrators we have active. I have a small favor to ask of you:

A lot of the evidence I've gathered for the RfC/U are talkpage messages in Portuguese. As the petitioning party, I'm obviously open to bias in the translation. Would you be willing to, only if requested by another member of the RfC, to "certify" whether or not my translation is accurate and if needed, add possible interpretations you may envision? They're mostly talk page messages, so I figure it wouldn't take more than 1 or 2 minutes per "diff". Unfortunately, our other active Portuguese-speaking administrator, Carioca, was involved in a third opinion on the matter, so I can't call on him to help me out.

If you could help out, I'd be greatly indebted to you!--Dali-Llama 23:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine

Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Participants. Why aren't you on the list? I've seen you edit/comment-on medical articles!

I'd like to hear your comments on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology/Collaboration of the Week. Looking at the Medicine and the Molecular and Cellular Biology collaboration projects, there is a real risk of burnout after the initial enthusiasm. Neither of those projects has brought an article to FA recently solely as a result of collaboration—there's always a principle editor. Colin°^Talk 22:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

get better soon

Hi Fvasconcellos, I hope you get better soon! --Kyoko 16:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks. --Kyoko 16:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a silly little note

I just wanted to pop in and say thank you for your comment on Flyguy's RfA. I fully realize that I tend towards verbosity, but I do so because I feel that "too much" information, is often more helpful than a simple one line comment, and with every RfA, or AfD/XfD I comment on, I try my best to include as much information that led me to my conclusion as possible. So I just wanted to say thanks. ^Ariel♥Gold 02:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Meu querido Fvasconcellos

Aceitarás o amor como eu o encaro ?...
...Azul bem leve, um nimbo, suavemente
Guarda-te a imagem, como um anteparo
Contra estes móveis de banal presente.

Tudo o que há de melhor e de mais raro
Vive em teu corpo nu de adolescente,
A perna assim jogada e o braço, o claro
Olhar preso no meu, perdidamente.

Não exijas mais nada. Não desejo
Também mais nada, só te olhar, enquanto
A realidade é simples, e isto apenas.

Que grandeza... a evasão total do pejo
Que nasce das imperfeições. O encanto
Que nasce das adorações serenas.

Mário de Andrade

Com muito amor, para meu querido amigo Fvasconcellos,
I missed you so much, my dear Renaissance man! :)
Phaedriel
22:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Ahem! Maybe I didn't make myself clear, my dear gentleman... "I" missed "you" while "I" was away... (and note to self: avoid poetic messages when I've been awake for 20 hours in a row ;) I hope you liked the little surprise above (and I know it is somewhat, err, erotic - but it's so beautiful, isn't it?) Phaedriel - 23:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Your superb images

Beautiful! Tim Vickers 01:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Tim Vickers 02:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome

and, if you feel like it, next time you want to thank someone for reverting vandalism in your user space, feel free to use {{subst:vangel}}. (Yes, I'm pimping it!) :) — Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim} ^dagnabbit!) 22:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey, that's really nice! One for the list :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Something odd

Hello Fvasconcellos, will you be online for the next five-ten minutes? There's something odd I would like you to help me with please. Acalamari 22:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; anyway, a user at WP:UAA called AntiFairyBot was reported there, and I blocked that account. AntiFairyBot, when you see the deleted contributions, has made some odd creations. Then, according to the log, AntiFairyBot created a new account, called The Disco Times, which has been tagging some users as sock puppets. What do you think is going on? Acalamari 22:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind; it seems the user suddenly went on a vandalism spree, and has now been blocked. That explains the odd behavior. Sorry about this. Acalamari 22:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, the apology was because I noticed the user get blocked, and I thought I may have accidentally wasted your time on a vandal. That was all. :) Acalamari 23:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

That is worrying, but if you look at the deleted edits for the bot (pages that I deleted after blocking), I was sure it was a joke bot, and looking at the bot's logs, it seems more like a joke bot. Acalamari 23:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I think The Disco Times is a sock of Squilliam. Look at this log, and then this log again. Acalamari 23:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Squilliam hasn't contributed since before these edits. We need to consider the possibility that the account has been compromised. I'll leave a message later, when I have time; let's not jump to any conclusions yet. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Medicine rant

(Message to Colin, Tim and Fv). You might want to follow this; I finally let loose on the rant that has been building since I became disillusioned that the Medicine Projects don't have a coordinated effort to combat medical misinfo, peer review articles, remove poorly sourced info, and maintain at least the medical FAs and GAs to a high standard. The Medicine Projects need a coordinated effort to review all FAs and GAs (to set the bar high where it belongs) and a method of dealing with the issues at articles like autism and Asperger syndrome (largely ignored by the Medicine Projects; if we don't maintain FAs and GAs at least, what the point?) and the messages left on my talk page about articles like pyroluria. Raul has given us the answer; will the Medicine Project do anything, or will they prefer to work on weekly collaborations that almost never yield featured articles? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Will look as soon as I can, Sandy (although responses to rants aren't usually expected :) I've been away these past couple of days and probably won't be back all the way for a while. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Pharmacology Update

Here's a brief update in some of the recent developments of WikiProject Pharmacology!

Aspirin has just completed its two week run as the first Collaboration of the Week! Many thanks to those editors that contributed; the article got a lot of good work accomplished, and in particular, much work was done in fixing up the history section. It's still not quite "done" yet (is a wikipedia article really ever done?), but after two weeks I think it's more important to push onwards with the development of the new collaboration of the week program. I will be fixing up Aspirin in the next few days and possibly nominating it for either GA or FA status.

Muscle relaxant has been selected as the new Collaboration of the week until October 2, 2007! This article is currently rated as a "stub", so it's got quite a bit of work cut out for collaborators! Admittedly, featured status could be a long way off,... but still attainable! At the least, maybe we could at least get it up to meeting the Good article criteria? Please stop by the article and help improve it.

Resveratrol, having recently achieved GA status on August 16, 2007, is now making a run for featured status. This is quite a fascinating compound. If you can, please stop by its discussion page and leave comments in support of it.

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing or dispensing medical advice amongst users. Specifically, talk pages of articles should only be used to discuss improving the actual article in question. To help alleviate this situation, the template {{talkheader}} may be added to the top of talk pages, reminding users of the purpose of such pages. Additionally, unsigned comments and comments by anonymous users that are inappropriate may be removed from talk pages without being considered vandalism.

There was an interesting article on ZDNet last week about Hewlett Packard licensing its patented microneedle technology used in common inkjet printers to be used in transdermal patches to deliver a time-controlled release of drugs to patients. This information could be added to articles such as route of administration or drug delivery.

You are receiving this message because you are listed as one of the participants of WikiProject Pharmacology.

Dr. Cash 05:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Also, thank you for dealing with the user that had been harassing me for months. I greatly appreciate it. However, I feel that he will most likely create more accounts for the sole purpose of annoying me. What actions should I take in the future, should this happen? Fuzzform 20:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Categories: User talk archives