User talk:Fvasconcellos/Archive 25

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

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 29

Happy Fvasconcellos's Day!

User:Fvasconcellos has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Fvasconcellos's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Fvasconcellos! Peace, Rlevse 01:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations Fvasconcellos :D Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  17:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

If you're offering...

I've nominated Intimacy recently and would appreciate your input like last time to get the process rolling. Thanks. RB88 (T) 15:22, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Will look. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

So, what do you think thus far? Any nitpicks? RB88 (T) 19:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Riiiiight. "Background information". (Better Than Heaven is a personal fave, just in case you need more background info.) :P RB88 (T) 20:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm baaack. Thanks for the comments. I was wondering if you would be able to take a stance since you are now happy with everything in the article. RB88 (T) 05:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

All righty. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

RTI-274

OK the compound with the 2-beta, 3-alpha (ie 1R,2S,3R) is called RTI-274.

Please can you change the name for this page?

U.S. patent 7,291,737 (31-32)

2β-((3,4-Methylenedioxyphenoxy)methyl)-3α-(4-fluorophenyl)nortropane

Then I can put a new image in the chembox? Regards. --Nuklear (talk) 16:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi FV,

I have to perhaps embarass myself with some ignorance and unsureness. This ref,[1] says about elimination constant. The half life looks extremely short so I think that it is not the same as elimination half life. Can you clarify that ref for me? I have added your talk page to my watch list.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 22:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

No, they're not the same, although they're related. You're looking for elimination rate constant; see, for example, [2], [3], and [4]. There's no need to be embarrassed :) I don't know a fraction of what I think I should know to edit more efficiently... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks FV, the links were helpful. :) I think I have an idea what it means now. I did actually find a ref which gave half life for bentazepam.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 23:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi

I've got Attachment theory at FAC just now. Someone's said the prose is a bit "puffy" and I was hoping maybe you could have a look at it as prose is not my best point. Thanks. Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:15, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, several kind people, including some serious FA writers, have been helping copy-edit and remove "puffy" prose but also several people have made the point that it's a bit difficult when you don't really know the subject. I was hoping you might have time to give it a once over.Fainites ^barleyscribs 16:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll have a look as soon as things are more settled. I hope the candidacy will still be running :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Help dealing with disabling language

Hi, we crossed paths once in regards to the usage of language; it was actually you who gave me a name for the concept of "disabling language". I'm currently in a conversation with an admin who is advocating for the usage of this phrasing: "(person) suffers from Asperger syndrome". I'd appreciate your input: please see Talk:Dustbin Baby (film)#Phrasing of content addressing Asperger syndrome. Thanks. Whatever404 (talk) 20:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

thx

for fixing temazepam. I am tired. Greetings from 70.137.137.64 (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Likewise. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Rumination syndrome

I had already looked into one section of that article and I expect a 2nd opinion would be helpful. Eubulides (talk) 16:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Your resources request

In regards to this request, please email me using Special:EmailUser/ThaddeusB if you still need to resource & I will be happy to reply with either a PDF or HTML copy of the document. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Attachment theory

Awadewit was looking at the prose for me but is now hors de combat unfortunately, so a look at the prose would be good, thanks.Fainites ^barleyscribs 11:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

That would be very kind. Thank you.Fainites ^barleyscribs 19:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Three hours is not enough! (Unless you're one of those lucky people who only needs a few hours night). Fainites ^barleyscribs 10:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

ketone bodies

Fvasconcellos, I have some diagrams of the three ketone bodies at the bottom of ketogenic diet. I wonder if you could work some SVG magic to polish them a little and to be consistent, and also if you could provide the alt text for them (I wouldn't know where to start). BTW: do you know why, when I do "Download as PDF", those three images are huge? Thanks, Colin°^Talk 22:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll probably be settled in by Wednesday (I'm moving again). I have no idea what's going on with the image size—I had the same problem when I tried to download a PDF copy of Linezolid. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Hope your move goes well and you aren't without precious internet access for long! I've put ketogenic diet up for peer review in order to push it towards FAC. I'd value your opinions and expert eye on the prose. Cheers, 17:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm finally settled, although I still have some stuff to move. Will get to it tomorrow, I promise :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Uniform requirements: I see some stray "" round titles, but the italics? Do you mean for the journal name? Just about all the citations I see in medical journals italicise the journal. I do find this makes it easier to read. I see the online book you mentioned says "Use caution when employing typography, such as bold type and italics, to indicate parts of a journal article citation. Too many variations in type styles may actually make the reference harder to read." But it doesn't go as far as to ban them. Do you think the Uniform Requirements perhaps don't actually specify typography, being formulated in the days of ASCII as a document format? Colin°^Talk 20:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Plus, aren't those just "submission guidelines", not the editorial house style of a printed journal? Is there consistency when printing medical citations? Colin°^Talk 20:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Proper NLM/ICMJE or "Vancouver" style does not use any form of typographical distinction, I presume because the rigid structure of the citation is itself sufficient to identify its parts; this is one of the reasons I don't like it. Most journals that follow or require this style really don't use italics or quotation marks (open any NEJM article and you'll see). However, as the book seems to give this "loophole", feel free to revert and I'll just fix the quotation marks, capitalization and pagination issues. I'm all for the use of italics and boldface when appropriate. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:01, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

House styles do differ. NEJM's follows the guidelines to the letter, even in print, as does that of Ann Intern Med and many others; JAMA italicizes journal names and only ever uses years as publication dates; Nature and Science use completely different styles, etc. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:01, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I look more closely, my sources do differ. It is never simple is it? What would you bold? I'll sleep on the italics. Colin°^Talk 21:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I've decided to keep your changes. I didn't start out with italics but they crept in somehow and I got to like them. My position on this and other guideline things of minor consequence (like naming at MEDMOS) is we should to to pick a standard that other, wise people have argued over, compromised over, and possibly come up with something everyone dislikes.

Since you know more about citation formats than is probably healthy, could you offer your opinion on the issue raised User talk:Eubulides#ketogenic diet. Citations say "this is what I read" but they also are used for attribution of quotes (which is the Greek or French I haven't read). I'm reluctant to lose the ancient-text-cite altogether as it is useful information. How should I format the citation -- I want to be honest that my source is Temkin so I agree with Eubulides on the need to emphasise that. Colin°^Talk 07:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah. Vancouver style doesn't provide for indirect citations, and generally does not accept them—the way to go here would be to cite the ancient text in the body of the article, with a direct reference to Temkin. For instance,

"Galen believed an "attenuating diet" might afford a cure in mild cases and be helpful in others.[ref]Galen, De victu attenuante, c. 1. As cited by Temkin (1971), p71[ref]"

would become something along the lines of

"In his De victu attenuante, Galen proposed an "attenuating diet" which he believed could afford a cure in mild cases and be helpful in others.[ref]Temkin (1971), p. 71.[ref]

(attenuante is usually rendered as "thinning" or "slimming", by the way. And no, I don't speak Latin ;) As an example, this article cites Galen's treatise as follows: "Galen in his treatise De victu attenuante [...] is necessary for obese people who should eat only once a day..."

Can I quote you on your "position on this and other guideline things of minor consequence"? That's more common sense than I've seen in quite some time. As for my unhealthy obsession with citation formats, blame it on the day job. An interesting aside: Brazilian journals that follow Vancouver style usually prescribe the use of apud for indirect citations (e.g. Galen, De victu attenuante, c. 1, apud Temkin (1971), p. 71.". I don't think it caught on in the English-speaking world. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

That's an option but it gets a bit complex with footnote 10 (an apud apud perhaps):

"In his De venae sect. adv. Erasistrateos Romae degentes, Galen tells us that the royal physician, Erasistratus, declared, "One inclining to epilepsy should be made to fast without mercy and be put on short rations."[ref]Temkin (1971), p. 57.[ref]

The reader is being told too much that he really doesn't need to know. What about using info-footnotes^{[Note 1]} for the Greek citation and normal ref-footnotes¹⁰ for the Temkin source citation?

BTW: if you are going to quote me on that, please fix my grammar and typos. I hadn't had my morning cup of tea when I wrote that. Colin°^Talk 12:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow, took me three days to reply. Hopefully, that's a new record... I think using info footnotes is a great approach. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

No rush. Are you still living out of boxes? I've changed the article to use footnotes. Does that work OK? Colin°^Talk 16:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Out of them and among them, living the U-Haul life... Excellent use of footnotes. I sense a little bronze star in the near future, good sir! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Great work on improving the lead text. Thanks! Colin°^Talk 10:15, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

And great work on expanding the ?history section here :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I've had a go at adjusting the levels of File:Liquigen.jpg and File:Measuring Ketocal.jpg. Since you originally took the pictures, could you look at File:Liquigen edit.jpg and File:Measuring Ketocal edit.jpg and see how much they were (inevitably) overcorrected? :D Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) The Liquigen edit is a big improvement and the colours are fine. Thanks! The Ketocal edit has overcorrected. The worktop really is a light brown marble-effect (not my choice) rather than black-grey. The tiles should be white leaning slightly towards creamy rather than bluey white. Both the hand and the jug seem a bit too colourful -- the jug is not quite as deep a colour as apple juice. I guess the original is washed out from the flash and it isn't easy to restore what has been lost or compensate for the effects of the flash. Do you want to have another go? I'm a wee bit worried that the Liquigen photo might fail the copyright test. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Obesity/archive2. I think the design goes a bit above utilitarian, so might be copyrightable. I'll ask. Colin°^Talk 08:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I'll either give it another try with a lighter hand or leave it as is. I don't foresee any copyright issues with the Liquigen bottle image—it certainly carries non-copyright restrictions (design, wordmark etc.) but the use of {{trademark}} would suffice. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Stifle‎ (talk · contribs) doesn't think the bottle label design is original enough, but borderline. The Liquigen and Ketocal logos are registered trademarks. Does that mean I should add that template to both pics? What do you suggest for swapping the Liquigen photo (and the other)? Do you just change the link to your edited one or would you replace the edited one over the top of the original? Colin°^Talk 14:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, all images that contain trademarked images, text etc. should be tagged with {{trademark}}. I guess it's better to change the link to point to the edited version. I'll move it to Commons and tag it as a retouched picture. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

OK. You know more about this than me. But for the record, I have no problems with you splatting over the original file. It is all in the version history, after all. Colin°^Talk 14:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Fvasconcellos, I'm not sure about the [] round the PMIDs. Eubulides has also questioned them. I think that the fact that the PMIDs are blue and have a hyperlink symbol is enough of a visual distraction without [] markup, and presumably colour and link symbols aren't governed by the Vancouver style. I see you moved the PMIDs after the DOIs. Don't mind either way on that. I'm not sure what punctuation should surround the DOI and PMID bits. Do you think we need a trailing period after the PMID number? Thoughts? I'm happy to make any changes so I'm not asking you to revert and I'm grateful for your help here (which I asked for!)Colin°^Talk 22:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

By all means, go ahead and remove them. (This is why I stick to {{cite journal}}; Wikipedia is mature enough to have developed a house style of its own, and there are no formatting inconsistencies to worry about.) I could go either way on trailing periods, although I prefer without—if you have a personal preference, that'll be fine. Sorry I haven't been of much help lately. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Message

Hello, Fvasconcellos. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine.
Message added by Captain n00dle ^T/_C 00:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Random order ternary mechanism.svg

Hi there, could you swap the arrows around in the product release section of this mechanism, (matching File:Random order ternary mechanism.svg.png). Thank you! Tim Vickers (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure! How could I have missed that? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Attachment theory

Oh dear. Does that mean it's too difficult a read for Wiki? Fainites ^barleyscribs 22:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Coat of Arms of Fredericton, New Brunswick

Could you please make a vector version of the following image (File:Frederictonarms.jpg), and upload it under a proper fairuse rationale? I think it would benefit it's quality. Thank you. Connormah (talk) 00:11, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I can certainly try. The source image is quite small, however, and I hope you are aware that the validity of uploading vector versions of non-free files is perennially questioned. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:14, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe you can use some flag images for the shields included, such as the Union Jack, and, I believe the top right one is a personal standard of a monarch. I'll check. Thank you for taking this on. Connormah (talk) 00:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Top right can be from File:UK Arms 1837.svg. Connormah (talk) 00:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's the shield of the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Could the crowns be the one in the Canadian Coat of Arms? (File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg) Connormah (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

That is a copyrighted image and I cannot use elements from it, but yes, those are the ones. I'll probably just redraw this; picking ready-to-use elements out of different COAs would give the image a very disparate appearance. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Connormah (talk) 16:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Anytime. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

There is the same crown on this PD image. Connormah (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Connormah (talk) 19:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

How is this coming along? Connormah (talk) 00:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Poorly, I'm afraid, and I apologize (computer trouble). If you're in no hurry, I can still do it, don't worry! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, no problems. Connormah (talk) 04:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hope you had a great holiday, how is this coming? No rush. ;) Connormah (talk) 04:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Why thank you

...once again, you come to my rescue. Thanks! —Ed (talk • contribs) 03:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries. I'd like to do more (some copy editing, a minor expansion) but time runs short. I was just checking my Watchlist and saw this at the DYK nom page... had to check it out :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 03:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:09, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Happy Halloween to you as well. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Attachment theory

No it's fine. Joe Smack says I have too many "ands" though.Fainites ^barleyscribs 19:51, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Bracket

Aww...but I was just spreading the love. :) 72.86.21.130 (talk) 22:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, ain't that sweet? :) Unfortunately, our articles are not the most appropriate place to do that. We are trying to build an encyclopedia, after all. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:14, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Regarding proper dash use

If you had a moment, would you consider skimming over the list of cutaneous conditions and making sure the dash use looks good? ---kilbad (talk) 20:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll have a look. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Mauricio Grabois

Obrigado

• [5]--MaximilianT (talk) 14:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

De nada! Welcome to Wikipedia, and I hope to see you write more articles in the future. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

I thought it was Riana replying to me with a different account. I didn't realize she was an administrator and probably wouldn't be doing this. I apologize for tagging your page. I wasn't aware of WP:DTTR. I actually that it was required in case you wanted to take further action against them later. -- Stillwaterising (talk) 10:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Molybdopterin.svg

Hi, Fv. Could you please take a look at File:Molybdopterin.svg? I believe the molybdenum should be an oxidized form based on Chemical Abstracts and literature such as this. I created File:Molybdenum cofactor.png (before realizing there was an existing image), which I think is accurate, that you can compare with. Although yours is a phosphate and mine is the parent acid. Feel free to replace my .png as you see fit with your .svg when it's corrected. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Ed. That image was originally supposed to be of molybdopterin, not molybdenum cofactor, then it was changed on request (see the file history), etc... Unfortunately, I can't create SVGs right now, so please keep using the PNG for the time being. Thanks for letting me know! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Romidepsin

On November 15, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Romidepsin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 01:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thalidomide edit

Ah, that explains it - I thought you'd lost your marbles :) Richerman (talk) 13:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I am chagrined

Sorry about repeating the vandalism on the page. I was going for a small amount of shock just to give whomever looked into it a good idea of the retarded vandalism the page was suffering. I forgot I could make a diff. My bad. But, thank you for protecting it. J DIGGITY SPEAKS 00:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, and you're welcome. I know vandalism can be very frustrating. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

76.106.205.76

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism; reinserting it despite multiple warnings is (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW). Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful thought may be needed to decide whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well-intended, or outright vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.106.205.76 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 21 November 2009

Calling people assholes is, unsurprisingly, one of the quickest ways to lose their respect and attention. It's also one of the fastest ways to be shown the door around here, so quit it. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for giving a smart length of time to semiprotection

Thanks for setting the length of time of semiprotection for Eli Whitney, Jr. to 6 months. This is very helpful to the page's watchlisting vandalism defenders (such as me). It is much more useful than a 2- or 3-week period, which I have seen used elsewhere in the past. Since watchlisting vandalism defenders are a resource that has real value for the viability of the Wikipedia project, it is good when someone performs a service that helps those volunteers and prevents their watchlist-combing time from running too long for no good reason. So thanks! — ¾-10 17:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. In my humble opinion, most admins are far too conservative with semi-protection nowadays—if every edit to an article in the past weeks, if not months, has been either vandalism or reversion, that's just a waste of resources and time. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

GA class medicine articles

(cc'd to Colin, Fvasconcellos and Eubulides)

Per User talk:Geometry guy#GA class medicine articles, I've started User:SandyGeorgia/GA class medicine articles. The goal is not a complete GA reassessment, rather to give Geometry guy a list of the worst offenders per WP:MEDRS (and I'm also noting the GA date and other issues as I go). If you'd like to help, feel free to edit the page. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Will see what I can do. Sandy, don't forget that strict MoS compliance is not even a GA requirement, and compliance with WikiProject guidelines and topic-specific MoS sub-guidelines is specifically excluded from the criteria; Medicine GAs technically need not comply with MEDRS to gain or retain GA status. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 11:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Orlistat generics in India

Not sure what do you mean by dodgy pharmacies but these are made by pharmaceutical companies (Orlistat) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.164.190.72 (talk) 20:02, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, thank you for adding a source (I presume you are Nagendrapsingh logged out :). Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)