User talk:RJSampson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contribution. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Take the time to edit your User page and let us know a little about yourself.

We are always looking for quality images for our articles. If you have any images which you can release freely, please upload them to Wiki Commons.

By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (but you don't need to sign articles; the software makes sure you get the credit you deserve).

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! User:Zeimusu

[edit] Hilary Clinton book

I think the interview is quite important in establishing Drudd's political view. If they think it's not true, ask them to provide sources to the contrary. (I haven't seen any yet) If reverts continue, feel free to contact me again. - Mgm|(talk) 08:38, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect problem

Hey Richard, I'm sorry you're having to put up with that. I've protected your employer's page. I can't guarantee that the protection will be long-term as another admin may change it for whatever reason, but I'll put a note on WP:PP explaining the situation. As for your home IP page, you don't have to have a redirect there either, if you don't want to. There's no policy against editing from multiple accounts or IP addresses, so long as they're not used to violate policy (e.g. by pretending to be two people: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet), although having said that, it's always best to stick to one account. I hope this helps. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:04, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, that user account has been deleted. Let me know if there are any other problems. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:48, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hiya

Thought I'd ask whether you'd like to join the WikiProject on Drugs. Thanks for your input on Talk:Dextromethorphan! ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 02:53, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi Eequor,
Sure, I'll join the WikiProject on drugs. What does that involve? I've never been a part of any projects before. Let me know the details!
Regards,
RJSampson 20:41, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry it's taken a bit long to get back to you... I've been away from the 'pedia for a while. Um.... To join the project, all you need to do is add yourself under the Participants list on the project page. I'm not entirely sure what the project has been up to recently, but there's a good deal in the various subpages. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 09:16, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hong Kong

Hi there RJ. I have only just noticed your questions about Hong Kong. HK island is mountainous, with series of high rise buildings going up the mountainside. Viewed from up high on a clear day, the vista of the city and the harbour together can present an attractive sight. However, describing the city or the territory generally as "gorgeous" would probably be going too far for most people, as many urban parts are very crowded and congested, and on many days there is substantial air pollution from industry in the south of China, with prevailing weather conditions keeping the smog over HK. Having said that, there is a great amount of natural beauty about HK which is generally not known or appreciated, although most of the very nice places are some way off the beaten track. And on clear blue days, many parts of HK are beautiful. For me, HK has been a great place to live, and for new visitors it should have a certain exotic quality. Re working here, the job market has been down for some time but is now supposedly turning around, so anything could happen if you were serious. If were not attempting to establish a business then you would need to be sponsored for a work visa. Most expatriates know very little or no Cantonese or Mandarin, although of course those who are fluent and can read & write tend to be in high demand. I am (unfortunately) mono-lingual myself, and had no previous connection with the place. You could come over as a tourist (no visa necessary for developed countries) to check it out and make direct inquiries about job opportunities. For something basic like teaching English, there are easier places to relocate in Asia (in terms of visa restrictions and opportunities) but HK is a very easy place to live. 203.198.237.30 04:41, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit]

Wow. Napoleon Dynamite looks much better now! Joyous (talk) 23:52, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Rjmgmy.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rjmgmy.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 13:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Buttermilk

I've replied to your comments on the talk page. –panda 15:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi RJ

Hi RJ, I am apart of WikiProject:Pharmacology, and I noticed you left a message there asking for others to help on the temazepam article. I don't understand why you need others to help, because frankly, I believe you, myself, and Wisdom (who is also a member of Project Pharmacology) can make the article better.

You state in your message:

I recently came across the temazepam article and found it to be bloated, poorly cited, and generally messy.

What exactly do you mean by "poorly cited"? Almost everything in that article is backed by scientific research, so the credibility of the information contained within the article is not questionable. The improvements that need to be made are not major and will not require extra assistance from anyone. You and I can make these changes on our own. I have the raw knowledge on the pharmaceutical, and since English is not my first language, you can work on the grammar. The article doesn't necessarily need to be shortened (or at least not by a lot), but just have the wording improved and the unnecessary things taken out. The only problem there is, is in the "History" section, the rest of the article is very sound. What we can do is, just take out all the detail that I went into and just shorten it up (not eliminate it). You should also know that I was the one that did the Nitrazepam article, which along with the Temazepam article are the very best and most informative BZ articles. They are both well backed by scientific research. Most of the other BZ articles are full of nonsense and they're bombarded by anon (and some none anon) users making edits (I suspect most of them are drug abusers). I have diligently gaurded Nitrazepam and Temazepam against such destruction.

GoodSon (talk) 20:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Goodson. I appreciate your message. I had hoped you might address some of what I brought up in my response to you in the talk page. First of all, our goal should be to get the article as close to 32KB as possible. There is just so much repitition (for example, the fact that Temazepam is the most toxic of all BZs is repeated several timess). There's no need for this article to be over 32 KB. This isn't an article on the French revolution or WW2 or anything. It's just a medication. Wiki guidelines say 32KB, let's try and get it to that.
As far as my comments on the poor citing -- there are definitely a lot of references in this article, I'll give you that. But I think some of the works cited may not be of the caliber as the others. I'm very interested in the books you reference. I tried to do some research on them, but I can't find any information. Of course, peer-reviewed literature is perfectly valid, but some of your statements aren't even addressed in your references. For example:
Benzodiazepines such as alprazolam and lorazepam, medications indicated for anxiety and panic disorders, were also more likely to be prescribed to patients suffering from insomnia than was temazepam.[10].
[10] refers to “Prescription Drugs: Their Use and Abuse.” I read this article, and it makes no reference to alprazolam and lorazepam being more likely to be prescribed than tempazepam
In the United States, temazepam is the only benzodiazepine which requires specially coded prescriptions in certain states.[11]
[11] refers to “What are the UK drug laws?” I read this as well, and it makes no mention of specially coded prescriptions – heck, it makes no reference to the US whatsoever.
Despite the much more stringent restrictions put on temazepam compared to most other benzodiazepines, temazepam remains to be the most sought after and abused benzodiazepine worldwide with more kilograms of diverted temazepam being seized than any other benzodiazepine, followed by flunitrazepam, diazepam, nimetazepam, and then nitrazepam.[12]
[12] refers to "Development of psychiatric illness in drug abusers. Possible role of drug preference". Again, there’s no references to the seizure of “kilograms” of temazepam. That’s not even what the article is about
Pharmacy burglaries and prescription forgeries in Scotland, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, and several Asian countries report that temazepam is often a main target, whilst other benzodiazepines are rarely targeted.[13][14][15].
None of these three articles mention anything about forgeries in Scotland, Australia, Ireland, Swedan, or Asia.
...Anyway, you're apprehensive about me trying to get other people invovled in this process. You don't need to be. Don't worry - if some drug addict or otherwise immature individual wants to vandalize the article or mess it up, people like you and I will catch it quickly and fix it.
The main reason, though, I got others invovled is that I'm not so sure that just you, I, and Wisdom can fix this. The reason is, you feel like this article belongs to you, you seem to think no one else could possibly know as much as you, and you think you should have final authority. That's just not what Wikipedia is about, GoodSon. It's not about personal glory. It's not about showing everyone how smart you are. It's about the entire community. Even though you know a lot about temazepam, you can't possibly everything about it. In fact, there is some information on its pharmacology that you have not included, but is very important. I'll be adding that once the article is trimmed down.
You should read the Wikipedia Policy about aticle ownership I placed on the talk page. To say that edits need to be approved by you is a violation of Wikipedia policy.
GoodSon, it's not like I'm trying to ruin or vandalize this article. I'm trying to clean it up and put it in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines. And yet, you've already threatened a "major war" against me. That is not the correct way to go about things, and it, too, is a violation of Wikipedia policy. So why do it?
Finally, it's clear that you have copied entire sentences, word for word, from journal articles. This is not just against Wikipedia policy, but it is considered plagiarism. In other media, people lose their jobs and fail classes when they do this. So all of that is going to have to be corrected.
So here's why I'm trying to involve the community in this rework: you admit English isn't your first language, you now see much of your content is overly long, I have pointed out citation errors, I have pointed out the word-for-word duplication of other people's work, and I have also pointed out aspects of official Wikipedia policy that you haven't followed. And you are insisting that you are the only contributor qualified enough to edit this article or to approve the edits of others, or else you will begin a "major war."
I have no doubt that you're well-educated and well-read in phamaceuticals, but how can you possibly be sure that you know more than any other contributor? I feel confident that I, too, am well-qualified to contribute. I have the education and years of research experience in animal models, and in many of my experiements I have used various BZs. I am well-read in the field, like you. And like you, I have acquired knowledge about BZs and temazepam that even other experts may have not yet come across.
Let's be civil about this, and let's follow Wikipedia guidelines throughout this process. Thanks for your dialogue. RJSampson (talk) 01:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)