User talk:Alteripse/archive5

The ref desk is not a soapbox; that's made very clear atop the page. You're welcome to restructure your comments to be factual rather than some opinionated political rant. Otherwise, expect removal; I find that far more honest than restructuring it all myself. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 12:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You answered with a parallel couched in the strongest possible POV terms. As above, I felt soft removal was more appropriate than chopping your comments into something else, and I attempted to leave no POV (not "my own POV") as a result. RD guidelines are quite clear that "If you wish to argue a particular viewpoint, please do so on an appropriate talk page". Points 7, perhaps 8, and 11 are fine. The rest are in clear violation. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 04:07, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It would be refreshing to see a response to the Ref Desk "no soapbox" policy rather than rambling vitriol. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 16:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your sweet disposition. --Arcadian 01:04, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is an unfamiliar characterization, but I will assume it was offered without irony, as my compliment on your additions was sincere as well. Thanks. alteripse 01:08, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if my tone was misintepreted -- rather than just say 'thank you for your kind words', I meant what I wrote above as playful kidding, by recycling icut4u's compliment to you. So, more straightforwardly this time, I thank you for your kind words. --Arcadian 01:21, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I assumed that was what it was. I appreciate kind words, it was just that my sweet disposition is not regularly recognized so there was a small moment of uncertainty as I said, "who, me?". alteripse 01:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello alteripse, i think we've got off on the wrong foot. I usually ramble on when i post, so i'm sorry for that already, hehe. Well, what i was referring to, is that there is a basis to all healthy diets, which is balance in micronutrients, and lessened intakes of salt, fat, sugar, and so on. In other countries, they have different food that makes up this balance.

As for the perspective, sure! I welcome new perspectives! and sure, i will write information relating to healthy eating with children, but the majority of the article relates to dietary advice that is to be given to children, and that is different from the healthy diet of sedentary adults, but the basis of balance is the same.

The problem is, that in the United Kingdom, particularly, children don't eat healthy foods at school, which is supposed to be the institution which provides them a figure which is supposed to be helping them, when in actual fact, they're receiving cheap procvessed burgers and chips from huge food companies! Now, weening children off these foods is difficult, because they're not likely to eat vegetables and healthier alternatives, because if they have the choice, they'll choose burgers (Jamies Kitchen also dealt with this issue).

However, as you can see, such a topic is very expansive, and would be ill-placed within tyhe healthy diet article. I will be adding the section relating to children, but it will be a small section, with a link to the fuller article which will contain a much more in-depth look at the issue.

Sorry for all the misunderstanding, i do apologise profusely! If you wish to help, your help is more than welcome on Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Nutrition.

Sorry again,

Some of the types of polydactyly listed at Polydactyly#Types of polydactyly sound bogus to me. Would you mind taking a look and making sure they're real, and perhaps explaining them? I appeal to your superior medical knowledge. —Keenan Pepper 04:11, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Off the top of my head there is nothing obviously bogus. The x-rays are so similar that I had to look closely to make sure the same films hadn't been simply flipped. I probably would not have loaded two of each but it is a small matter. alteripse 08:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have signed in at the Lounge.DocJohnny 13:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are only a couple of responses. I would like to let this stay as the responses help me understand what the community thinks of the worth of various articles. -

If I thought it was a stub for a valid article, I would not have nominated it in the first place. Right now it is no more then a dictionary definition that has not significantly expanded in almost two years. Relax and let the community decide what to do. That is why we have deletion processes -

talk 17:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks very much for giving me three specific points to work on in my article, Intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy. I have eliminated the red links, given full names to all individuals, and I have added a section examining the relationship between CBT and ISTDP. I think your suggestions were spot-on.

--Robert Tarzwell 18:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, some time ago you added a fair bit of content to

It's the basic knowledge of my profession. We could reference any pediatric endocrinology textbook. The basic research was many decades ago and not available online. alteripse 22:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Question for SimonP. I just looked at the virilization article. It is really basic stuff, mainly definitions and terminology. I wrote virtually the whole thing as part of preparation for a go at redoing our atrocious intersex article which I haven't mustered the courage to attempt yet-- I am trying to make sure that there are plenty of available uncontroversial background articles on basics before I try. Do you think there is anything in it that needs citation because of being potentially controversial or not agreeing with other reliable sources on this topic, or are you just asking me to provide more references in general? Thanks alteripse 00:28, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have found it fascinating to trace back certain key concepts to their first mention in the literature, even if the classical material is not available online. Personally I try to do both - a classical resource and a recent review/textbook chapter (I favour reviews). JFW | T@lk 22:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, the more I make it like work, the more I ask myself "why am I doing it here"? Actually, that is only a partial answer. The articles I expected to be controversial I have referenced in detail back to the 1950s: see

intersex surgery for much documentation.alteripse 23:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

The great thing about being a volunteer is that no one can make you do anything. I specifically created the system of talk page warnings to eliminated the bullying tactic of slapping {{unreferenced}} on articles. References are useful, but they are certainly not so important that we would want to sacrifice good contributors for them. - SimonP 00:35, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But see my question about virilization below your first comment. alteripse 00:43, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally it would be great to see a list of some of the basic reasearch papers, even if they are not online. As Jfdwolff mentioned, such information is of interest beyond simply as a source. - SimonP 00:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hope your well, best wishes Erich 18:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is "complicated" or "unsettled". I haven't found one dictionary that even suggests any doubt about the etymology. Please reply on that talk page, not my user talk page. --BRIAN0918 18:15, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite clear about gold stars of truth beyond their sounding good, and I don't know what it refers to, but my experience of your contributions here has been so positive I'm positively itching to know. Can you point me in the right direction?

Now to the instant issue. There has been a disassembly of the diabetes article (see the history, of course) and creation of some new ones (to wit Type 1 and Type 2 and perhaps others, there are now pointers in the main diabetes article). I've left comments at all three mentioned out of irritation at exactly what I (and I'm pretty sure you) foresaw would likely happen. But leaving aside my pique, WP's coverage of DM has decreased in quality (however low it was before) in respect to overview and perspective, especially for layfolk (ie, victims). Not a Good Thing. You have many things on your plate, but you also have professional qualifications and knowledge and, more to my point, an ability to write clearly, hence this note. Your probable observation about punishement for the virtuous is apposite, but history suggests inevitable.

Perhaps you could look into these and at least leave a guiding comment or two (as from an MD) to encourage (and even, may the gods approve!!, direct) further refactorings/revisions/aultiy reductions? My beginnings are, I'm sure, inadequate, and, in any case I'm sure, too pique ridden to have much effect in those directions. Perhaps even candidates for Medical Collaboration of the Week? The underlying conditions are certainly important enough to qualify! ww 18:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You said: "Let's get this obese distraction a room of its own before it takes over this one."

Huh? -- Jason Palpatine 08:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See list of famous overweight people and my comments on the AfD page. alteripse 11:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think you fixed many of the problems associated with the thyroid article, but it would be helpful if you would take a look at Nature's list of errors to be sure they were all addressed. - Nunh-huh 18:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know for sure, but I would hazard a guess the sailing in the New Hebrides now is much better than the sailing in New Hampshire, point well taken! SailorfromNH 22:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the message you left regards making sure the original author of

Thanks for responding to my request on separating Epispadias from Hypospadias. I'm still learning my way around Wikipedia (even though I registered months ago!). So much to write, so little time... Regards. Tony Makhlouf

The Seventh-day Adventist Church is based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. The wiki specifies that they still follow the word of Leviticus.

• No, the Seventh-day Advenist Church does not follow a literal interpretation of the Bible. Their views on prophecy are far from it. MyNameIsNotBob 06:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, would you mind taking a look at my edits on Rheumatic fever? I am getting tired and need more eyes on that article. :) --DocJohnny 05:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Nice work. See critique at talk:Rheumatic fever. alteripse 19:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alteripse, Can you show me where you have found a "oil suspension" for testosterone? Than you, Cavell 04:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)Cavell[reply]

The oil suspension is the main one used for treatment of hypogonadism and delayed puberty in the US. A common brand is Delatestryl. I put the url link in the edit comment for you when I removed your edit. Here it is again: [1] alteripse 04:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the link. I am aware of course of testosterone enanthate, but was unaware of the fact that it was regarded as a suspension in oil. Since your knowledge of this exceeds mine, thank you for the clarification. Cavell 02:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Cavell[reply]

• You are welcome. Sesame oil to be precise. You can use your lack of detailed knowledge of this as evidence of lack of personal use of this stuff if you need to (joke) since if you had used it, you would have known that the oil suspension makes it difficult to draw with any needle thinner than 18 gauge, quite different from aqueous solutions of injectable hormones. alteripse 02:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean to say that all test. enanthates possess this characteristic, because I can easily use every enthanate I have ever had with as small as a 25 gauge. Also, are all injectable, oil based steroids (enthanates, propanates, decanotes, undelclaotes, etc) regarded as "suspensions"?Cavell 05:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)Cavell[reply]

OK, then I will confess I haven't actually had it in my hands for a very long time. I have done a few testosterone shots in past years when a nurse was not available, but it has been many years since then, and it has been decades since I looked at the prescribing info for Delatestryl closely. I just checked the PDR and found

1. It is still sesame oil, which is what I remembered, but it is currently described as a solution in oil rather than a suspension. There is a basic chemistry difference between a solution and a suspension, especially when in water. I think the practical difference between most solutions and suspensions is whether the active ingredient settles or not while standing. So if your original point was that it was an oil solution rather than an oil suspension it appears that you are correct with regard to the current formulation of Delatestryl. I thought the issue was whether it was in oil or water-- it is and AFAIK has always been oil since steroids are not easily water soluble. I think it was once described as a suspension but I may be wrong and have nothing at hand to prove or disprove it.
2. Delatestryl seems to be reformulated and marketed by a different company than in the 1980s. I note that the newer formulation comes in syringes with 20 gauge needles. It used to come in vials and the nurses complained that it was hard to draw so we usually prescribed it with 18 gauge needles. I am not sure whether it has been reformulated and is thinner than it used to be or whether you have different standards for "drawing easily".
3. Testosterone cypionate no longer has a PDR entry. I haven't had a pharmacy ask if they could substitute it for enanthate for a couple of years and maybe it is no longer available in the US.

Bottom line: the major current US brand formulation of testosterone for parenteral injection seems to be Delatestryl, which is properly described as an oil solution for IM injection. Does that cover it? alteripse 11:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please see new post at Talk:Newborn Screening--Pleidies 19:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No longer anon, now Pleidies. I welcome your input and discussion on my proposed changes to the newborn screening entry which can be found at Talk:Newborn screening--Pleidies 19:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, alteripse. I was wondering if I'd misunderstood your post to HW on WP:ANI. You seem to be inviting her to go ahead and create yet another sock account, but I can't believe that's how you meant it. Were you aware that she's still blocked? I've blocked her new account. There seems to be consensus, apart from your message, that sitting out this block is the least we should ask of her. (Actually behaving herself for the last two days of her block would be the first gesture of good faith she's ever made.) And yet you haven't unblocked her either, so I'm not sure what you think of the situation. Could you please take a look at my reply? (I probably won't post again tonight, as it's 3 AM in my timezone.) Bishonen | talk 02:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made the suggestion on the assumption that she seemed to have access to more IPs and that the block was not working. I agree that sitting out the block would have been the wisest choice if she wanted to continue to use the HW account. I don't particularly care, but was sick of the whining and my response was an attempt to get her to see that she has created so much ill will that a fresh start might be the wisest course. I probably just should have ignored her as her interests seems far away from mine. I don't intend to get further involved, certainly not a dispute over how to handle her. alteripse 04:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed the block's not working, since her IPs are nimble and her range too big to block. I do think, though, that the least we have to ask ask is that she honor the block for two days (out of two weeks of block evasion). It's too absurd that the community would make all the concessions, and the user with the richly-deserved block none. I do appreciate the things you said to her about all the (quite unreasonable) bitching and moaning. You may even have gotten through to her — I hope so. Bishonen | talk 05:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I actually finished high school in the US (in Indiana). I've kept in touch with lots of people, including a couple of my former teachers, so I remember Martin Luther King Day. :) My pleasure re the reversion. Sarah Ewart 14:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice to meet a Wiki-Hoosier! I went to South Knox High School in Vincennes. I was on a student exchange program, but I also spent a bit of time in Bloomington as one of my cousins was at IU and also up in Lafayette as my aunt and uncle live there (my uncle teaches at Purdue). Sarah Ewart 14:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye on the user's talk page. Maybe after sleeping on it he'll see his mistake. That's some very insightful commentary at the Reference Desk, by the way. Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for both. alteripse 14:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone created

1. I am inclined to insist that the Islets of Hope site acknowledge our work if they want to include it.
2. I wonder whether the LADA material was borrowed from another copyrighted source since they did not bother to attribute the MODY material to ours.
3. I haven't looked at their other contributions or compared other parts of their website to see if more recombination has occurred.
4. I don't want to discourage a new contributor with some diabetes knowledge and good intentions but we need to clarify the relationships of the this site and hers. alteripse 11:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A comment: I had added the information on hyperosmolar coma to the Glucose meter article. Although today's glucose meters do not provide specific values beyond their high — which as you indicate is <=600 — the ability to monitor very high blood sugars is important, allowing a patient to take action before they reach the point of of hyperosmolar coma (e.g. prevent the complication). Compare to the pre-glucometer days ... I've not added the information back, but would appreciate a conversation on the point. —ERcheck @ 11:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:glucose meter for reply. alteripse 12:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

exscuse me but also Muriel has done this trying to get people to delete this article important for a monarchic branch. This is a democratic encyclopedia and so this page has right to stay here : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosario Poidimani (3 nomination). Regards, M.deSousa 24 January 2006 (UTC)

What is your area of specialty? Can you tell me anything about heart sounds and other heart-related (specifically CHDs) topics? If not, do you know of any doctor wikipedians who do specialize in cardiology? Thanks bcatt 22:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, definitely not my area. Go check out the doctor's lounge page at the wikiproject:Clinical medicine where most people have their specialties listed. We have a couple of internists who are probably your best bet. alteripse 00:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help, I'll check that out. bcatt 00:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you point me to the article that has the "Mrs Soandso commits indecent acts with dead frogs" in it? I'd like to look it over. Thanks KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Danville, Pennsylvania. alteripse 02:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't see a real reason to go through and delete those specfic versions, I also don't see where it could cause any problems if that did happen. If (hypothetically) it had the persons real name address and slanderous info then I think it would be cause to delete. It may be gross vandalism, but it is still simple and sadly very common. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It shocked me because I know him as a well-liked teacher. alteripse 02:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol sorry to laugh but I didn't know teachers could be well liked. :-P Anyway I hope this helped! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've read lots and lots of articles of this type. When I worked as a RN my specialty was high risk pregnancy and maternal and infant death. More recently, I've went back to school studying medical sociology/cultural anthropology/behavioral medicine with an emphasis on reproduction. Unfortunately, many of these studies are terribly biased and of no real value. Only looked at the abstract, so I can not say for sure about this one. I need to set this laptop up to proxy the university library so I can read at home. --FloNight 04:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised this stuff hasnt surfaced more in custody battles and ugly divorces. alteripse 04:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Jimbo Wheels: "Arriving in this community with that user name is like showing up at a synagogue social hour with a nametag that reads Jesus Hitler."

That had me laughing for 10 minutes straight. :) ~MDD4696 04:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

glad you liked it. alteripse 05:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

alteripse, I'm sorry you thought my comments were an attack on the article. As you point out, the article isn't finished yet. You asked for comments! I pointed out the flaws in the research. I have no agenda to push and I will write an equally strong defense of the research, if needed. Often, lack of visual cues when reading comments is the cause of such miscommunication.

This topic is shared by

I'm interested in reproductive issues. The abortion debate in the US has polluted the topic. Many mainstream researcher avoid it because it always leads back to the abortion and abstinence debate. This means much of the research is done by the those with an extreme pov. IMO, Ellis is pushing a pov. Easy to do with weak study design. Today, issue groups are using it to push their agenda. That is not alright because it wastes research money and condones weak research methods. We need solid research that links bio-medical and sociology/anthropology. I hope this help you understand my comments. --FloNight 16:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Looking again at your comment, I think I misinterpreted the antecedent of your last pronoun.alteripse 17:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC) Take a look at the puberty social influences section. Have I done your concerns justice? I am thinking of moving it to the menarche article and shortening the version in puberty. What do you think? alteripse 19:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The the whole article looks very nice : ) Only one suggestion re: social infuences section. When you re-write it, include some where that it may not fully address the variety and complexity of family units. I like what you've done with puberty, but would work in menarche too. --FloNight 23:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alteripse - in spite of your ad hominem attacks on me, you will now have noticed that your article on HGH - which I think is necessary, contained lots of good information, and was well intended - has degenerated into an edit war. It is very important to write even initial drafts of articles as neutrally as possible, or at least provide a structure that lends itself to constructive editing, or else people with different points of view go nuts on it. I want to encourage you to work on the article, because you obviously have a lot of knowledge on and interest in the matter; but you will get nowhere if you want to make it a soapbox. --Leifern 02:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• No edit war. I removed the text I had added because I don't have the time and energy for fighting over it at the moment. Your input on this and the anti-vaccine pages has been a combination of useful suggestions and a couple of really blind misrepresentations of wikipedia policy to support a pro-quackery POV. It is simply not honest and not encyclopedic to present fraudulent and misleading pseudoscience as "another point of view" like a theological debate. Whether you can understand that I am not sure. alteripse 02:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the Fort Wayne, Indiana article:

The only links I got rid of were irrelvant ones to external sites. I don't think it's good (though maybe I'm wrong), for example, to show the external link for Amtrak (http://www.amtrak.com/) each time Amtrak appears in an article. The rest of the link changes were to the subdivisions of the airlines which have their own article, such as Delta Connection. Also, it's spelled Delta Air Lines, not Delta Airlines. That was my primary fix, and then I noticed all the other things. Hope that helps explain why I changed the links accordingly. Let me know what you think. All the best. --Allstar86 21:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess not a big deal either way. I didnt follow the links & probably should have. Revert if you want. alteripse 22:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and thanks :-) --Allstar86 20:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello alteripse : ) Saw that you worked on Contact immunity. Pretty high quality article for a new user. I helped Rlax cite sources on the article. Could be a high quality editor! Did you every hear back from our concerned father? I need to follow up, I suppose. Last time I looked you were still working on moving the info around between menarche and puberty. That's been awhile ago, so your probably finished. I'm sure it's great work as usual. : ) FloNight ^talk 12:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an isolated event? Or do we have a smirk bandit? FloNight ^talk 02:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it might be the answer to your question about whether we have heard back from our "concerned father". alteripse 02:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a 34 year old Norwegian female with Turner syndrome (mosaic 45,x/46,XX). I became spontanousely pregnant and I have a perfectly normal six year old son. I know a little genetics from my university studies. I am still a bit confused and anxious. If I tried to get another ichild, would the possibility of a chromosome disorder be greater than normal? I guess the big question is: Will one of my abnormal cells divide and produce egg cells or is it just my normal cells who produce egg cells? Would an eggcell without a sex chromosome be able to mature and produce a follicle at all?

If anyone have any information on the matter, or any information about any other female with Turner syndrone who spontanousely became pregnant, I would greatly appreciate it. Please Email me: [email protected]

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Turner_syndrome"

You mentioned a way to make chloral hydrate at home. I have prescriptions for it and pay through the nose for it. If I had a way to make it that would be dandy. It really helps sleep. I was sad to hear in can cause liver damage though..

• I am sorry, but I am the person who removed the recipe because I thought it was reckless of us to be posting a recipe for "knock out" drops. I always thought chloral hydrate was cheap but I am either misinformed or simply comparing it to so many newer drugs. alteripse 02:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Jim- I understand. It's expensive now because not too many companys will carry it. Currently I think Somnote is the only one. Thanks

From Jim again- Might I also mention it is a good drug as a sleep aid for headache sufferers because it doesn't have rebound effects that some drugs have such as acetaminophen. Most doctors are unaware of the rebound effects from pain killers and sleep aids. Other headache sufferers should keep this in mind or mention it to their prescription writers. Chloral hydrate is an old drug but is free of rebound effects and grogginess in the morning.

Here's a copy of the message I just left on the talk page of Phimosis, in case you haven't seen it:

Then why was the page listed for reference cleanup? As it was, I hadn't even finished converting the links. It is entirely possible to adapt the previous format, including authors, what content is in the article, the publisher, using the {{cite web}} format.

Jude (talk,contribs,email) 11:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Alteripse, Someone removed a deletion tag from the aforementioned article. SnoopY 05:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just refreshed the page, and it was changed--is this good content? SnoopY 05:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not in my interest area but not written like an encyclopedia article and may be a vanity page. alteripse 21:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am contacting you over concer about your block of ip 207.229.174.14. Looking at his talk page and contributions, this seems like a content dispute, not vandalism. Can you explain as to why a block of his IP was warrented? Please note, I am -not- an admin, just a concerned user. --OrbitOne talk 06:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The combination of volume, speed, and ignorance made me doubt a simple good faith error but I responded to his reply and quickly unblocked him. See User talk:207.229.174.14 for the exchange. We'll see. alteripse 12:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you saw my response on Talk:Phimosis. I've created an example of what the first section of Phimosis would look like in the m:Cite/Cite.php format, using {{cite journal}} here. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 08:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recently I tried to replace my user page (User:Lcarsdata) with a version I had been creating at User:Lcarsdata/v3 unfourtunatley when I moved my current one to a new page (so I had an archive) it created a redirect and now I can't move v3 to the main one so I am stuck. Please could you delete my user page so i can replace it with v3. Thanks in advanced. Lcarsdata ^{Talk | E-mail | My Contribs} 07:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, wasnt around yesterday. Do youstill need this done? I can do it this evening. alteripse 10:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kosovo#2 Administrator for Ex-Yugoslavien articels in Wikipedia- The voice of Kosovar

• hi, I saw in the subject Text box that you left a question asking "where can we find the code for making a text box in wikipedia?" located Talk:Text_box. Did you every get a response or find how to do it? Any information would be appreciated. lcoviedo 19.April.2006

There was no response but I have figured out how to do it. See some examples in an article I am working on User:Alteripse/diabetes workshop. Basically, I would suggest finding an example of a box style you like and examining the code in edit mode. alteripse 07:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alteripse. Thanks for the welcome. I am who my tag suggests. I figure that it would be strange for me to edit intersex content with a pseudonym, and might seem shady if people learned that I had done so. No? You offered some suggestions for how to make edits to controversial pages. May I ask you to be more specific? I'm trying to be respectful of the wikipedia community and content. Do you think that the edits I have made should have been posted to talk pages first? Can you direct me to a controversial article where edits have been negotiated at talk pages, so I can learn the style? Are some of my edits too large? Also, since you know my identity, and say that we have met, would you like to tell me your identity? Cherylchase 01:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enable your email on your page, and I will send you a message with some more detail about your questions. alteripse 01:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking it up! Would you add it to the article? I'll probably do some research on alternate explanations. My gut tells me there's not much consensus on it. It this fun? 8-) --CTSWyneken 22:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which article? Satan? I don't want to attract his attention. alteripse 22:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly new to wikiedia, and I couldn't find the answer to this. Is a reference valid when it is a link to a forum that is closed to viewing, where you have to register, with email verification, to even view the forum? Just wondering about the reference here: [5] just below: The serological data is lost, but something may yet come as a result of the original study:

"On a case-control basis there is some pretty good data, which I should tease out and do something with." (then the reference to the closed forum) But then again.. I guess anything goes in discussion? Thanks. Stmrlbs 00:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basically anything civil and relevant goes on talk pages. Most editors would remove closed forum links unless they offered information both vital to the article and unavailable elsewhere, but would describe the link. alteripse 00:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did not think cites were even required for discussion until apers0n asked me for one. Then I was wondering what exactly the guidelines were for discussion, what was required/not required when you made a reference to an outside source. ok.. I think I have the picture. Thanks again. Stmrlbs 00:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to say, that I thought your answer to the races/breeds question at the RD was very well thought out and impressed me with its attention to nuance. I usually assume the worst when people try to answer genetics and race-related questions in the reference desk (most people don't know a lot about the details of the subject and most accounts of it the news media are horribly misleading), and was pleasantly surprised. --Fastfission 22:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry for having choosen the wrong place to paste my question Foreigner 10:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No big deal. I was actually wrong in where I suggested you put it. The WP:Requests for comment is actually the best place to ask for the help of other editors regarding the content of an article. alteripse 10:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why I didn't think of that. Yay! Thank you! Now I can quietly think it to myself more quickly... Skittle 09:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read you're an endocrinologist, cool. I'm very interested in metabolic disorders and would like to specialize in endocrinology some day if I get the chance, I have one question though I'm wondering maybe you have an answer to me. A med student friend of mine said that endocrinologists mainly work with diabetics. Is this true? While diabetes is indeed a very interesting disease I get the feeling that working post-residency until retirement with mostly diabetics would become boring in the long run. What's your experience? Regards, Jack Daw 17:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diabetes represents about half the endocrine disease out there. However, there are lots of ways to do endocrinology, and some avoid diabetes by being in big departments where they can specialize in a narrower range of problems. In general there are two kinds of endocrinologists: (1) those for whom diabetes is the most important and interesting disease of all because it requires knowledge and therapeutic intervention at every level from the molecular to the social and necessitates a personal relationship with a patient, and (2) those who don't like those very characteristics, and would much prefer thinking about lab tests and hormone physiology to why their patient does or doesnt do what you wish he did. You have to decide which description fits you. alteripse 18:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your working toward simplicity in the lead section of Down syndrome. The first paragraph was the result of compromise among some very strong-willed editors, starting around the first of the year, and concluding with this discussion: Talk:Down_syndrome/Archive_2#What.27s_in_a_name. While one of the editors finally gave up and has not been seen since, I'd hate to go back on a compromise that was worked out. If nothing else, it has withstood several attempts to change it. In the United States and Canada, the accepted term among genetic professionals is Down syndrome. In other parts of the British Commonwealth, it seems that Down's syndrome is the accepted term. If we are after accuracy, then this is needed, and I think the compromise wording does it with minimal fuss. Why use less precise wording? Ted 01:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The terms are interchangeably recognizable by the entire english-speaking world. The intro sentences of an article should inform the reader as to the topic of the article so he immediately recognizes he is at the right place, and then provide perhaps the 3-6 most important facts about the topic. The largely ignored geographic differences in apostrophe use results from a medical journal style decision in the 1970s which has been adopted only unevenly around the world. I suspect the actual usage does not follow the claimed geography very cleanly but dont care enough to argue that aspect, and have never heard anyone actually argue strenuously for one form over the other. While we can mention the origin of the two terms farther down in the article, perhaps in the history of the terminology, I would not put it in the top 50 facts about Down syndrome that an encyclopedia article should provide. It certainly does not belong in the lead sentence of the article. I just got the new edition of a standard genetics text which has an excellent 3 page article on the topic, and I was planning to add a few missing things to this article but was stopped by the awkward, trivial, and questionably accurate opening sentence. alteripse 11:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to contribute or not as you see fit. It is entirely up to you. I'll look again at the introduction in the light of simplicity. As for "questionably accurate," the whole problem is with accuracy. Should we also include "Mongolian Idiocy?" It is still used, and is broadly recognized. However, it doesn't reflect professional usage. I guess I'm stuck on "professional" usage. Thanks again for your comments. Ted 19:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a matter of style even more than accuracy. The geographic distribution of

Relating to the context under History my opinion is that the expression "mongolian idiocy" should not be used and be replaced with it or this: By the 20th century, ‘’this’’ had become the most recognizable form of mental retardation”, as both expressions have been used sufficiently in the sentences above, thus avoiding overusing what has become a negatively charged expression and emphasizing the correct one – even if the dispute and change is described further down (no pun intended). --Profero 16:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A, you have joined the side of the censors who are attempting to vandalize the article on the Presbyterian Church's anti -Semitism problem. Despite third party reputable sources that report that the PC has been accused of anti-semitism, you have supported those who consistenly delete that information. If you feel the PB church is not anti semitic, you are certainly free to add information to the article and cite sources that say it is not - it is vandalism, however, to delete information that such a controversy even exists. I would guess that you are a man of science from your talk page, since that requires a clarity of thought I would hope that upon reconsideration YOU will edit the PC article to include the anti-semitism information (adding to it if you wish information that would attempt to refute that charge).

Only a rabid and bigoted fanatic assumes that an objection to Israeli policy is the same as antisemitism. You have similar intellectual difficulty with the concept of vandalism, which is not applicable to a content dispute. I don't even consider your nonsense to be vandalism, just unacceptable from a factual and POV standpoint. And note that I did not remove your references or the fact that some jewish extremists equate criticism of israel with antisemitism-- all I did was make sure it was attributed as an opinion rather than presented as an indisputable fact. That you call that censorship and vandalism should tell you how ridiculous your accusations are. alteripse 19:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but where did I ever say that objectng to Israli policy constitutes antisemitsm? You have established a straw man, allow me to knock it down - it is very permissible to criticise Israel policy on a specific matter and not only fail to be an anti semite but actually be a pro Israeli Jew - Jews and Israeli Jews constantly criticise Israeli policy, there are several democractically elected parties there that constantly clash on policy. There is a tipping point, however, where valid criticism can cross over to actual anti Judaism (that man, who happens to be a Jew, is a crook v. all Jews are crooks); legitimate sources are quoted as saying that the Presbyterian Church is antisemitic (you can read the cites for their reasoning) - that the PC is accused of anti semitism is a legitimate, valid point to raise in an article about the PC - I did not state in the article that I thought the PC is antisemetic, I edited to indicate that valid sources have taken that position (I have made my own beliefs clear in the talk section, where the standards for what is permissible are different). To take out that information is censorship, and an attempt to withhold from the article information that should be known to the reader. I would therefor suggest you once again read the Wiki rules, and make the appropriate edits yourself.Incorrect 00:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your cites say no such thing. None of them mention the terms antisemitism or blood libel. As I responded on the talk page, you are only person to use those terms, referenced with articles that simply complain about their anti-israeli- policy policy. Your arguments here are simply dishonest. alteripse 00:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the article talk page for my apology for claiming that none of the references supported your characterization. One of the 3 did. alteripse 02:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:::BIRMINGHAM, June 16 — Presbyterian James Woolsey ran the Central Intelligence Agency during part of President Bill Clinton's administration, so his take on world events carries a certain weight among General Assembly commissioners. He minced few words when he spoke during an unofficial General Assembly gathering Friday. Woolsey criticized the General Assembly's 2004 decision to consider divesting in companies that refuse to reform such practices as selling bulldozers to raze the homes of Palestinians living on land disputed with Israel.

"We have, I'm afraid, moved into a posture…that, unless what we did two years ago is rejected, we are clearly on the side of theocratic, totalitarian, anti-Semitic, genocidal beliefs, and nothing less," Woolsey declared. http://www.pcusa.org/ga217/newsandphotos/ga06031.htm incorrect

You are intellectually and ethically bankrupt if you equate criticism of Israeli policy with genocidal antisemitism. Go bother someone else. alteripse 23:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your reply to my RD post regarding oxygen deprivation. Your comments were of great assistance. 209.181.219.151 17:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you are welcome

Discussion moved to Talk:Sex#Usual_Sexual_Orientation. Omgitsasecret 04:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noted your comment in the talk section of

I'm not sure why you removed the references to recent studies showing no added benefit of T3. Obviously, one of the reasons people take Armour is because it contains T3 as well. JFW | T@lk 20:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I moved them to talk, where I explained that it is a distinct issue and would be better covered in the article on treating hypothyroidism. I am not done revising the end, but I assume you noticed that neither reference used desiccated thyroid, and both used different mixes of T4 and T3, and thus are of little relevance to the efficacy of Armour thyroid. I want to represent both sides fairly and I hope you agree that so far I have done that, but I would also like to be accurate and balanced and the article as of this morning was neither. alteripse 20:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you in the "Recent Changes" and thought I'd take advantage by asking you to look over Elliott P. Joslin to see if I've made any egregious errors... - Nunh-huh 01:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me. Was Bliss your source? I have a copy of the Allen diabetes manual from about 1918-- it was the original Atkins diet-- no carbs at all, surprisingly upbeat considering it was a miserable diet that only added months to lifespan for most of these children. alteripse 04:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend deleting the last three sentences about the inaccurate and obsolete "criminal karyotype" concept in the paragraph about 47,XYY...

Panda411 07:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: I moved your comment, which is appreciated and deserves serious response, to the Y chromosome article talk page, since it is entirely about the content of the article. alteripse 12:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to disagree with your diagnosis, but the skin color indicates an age and not a sex difference. For more on this particular homoerotic scroll, please see [6]. You will see that boys are every bit as gaudily dressed as women, and are put to much the same uses. Haiduc 03:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even the hair? Ok, clearly this is a topic I should have avoided, but I'll bite. What is the indicator that they are both male? alteripse 04:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a connaisseur of Eastern tonsures, the identification was made by experts as you can see from the link I indicated above. Also, take a look at this for a more explicit image which also shows the similarity between the man's and the boy's hair styles. Haiduc 00:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at Solomon Berson and correct anything I forgot. JFW | T@lk 23:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David, I need your help on Talk:Diabetes mellitus. JFW | T@lk 15:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to personally thank you for answering my question on the MD "Mess" page, about andropause. I am well acquainted with menopause (sigh), but was not familiar at all with any serious discussion of 'male menopause'. With all the television advertising, I have sometimes wondered if diseases or disorders ("social anxiety disorder" comes to mind) are invented to sell pharmaceuticals. Alas, it would not surprise me if aging is someday labeled a 'disorder'. I consider aging a normal life process, and have no desire to be 30 again. Anyway, thank you again. I learned something today!jawesq 05:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. alteripse 11:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if maybe you could help me with an endocrinological question of sorts. I thought it might be more convenient to ask you directly rather than ask at the reference desk. Anyway you can just ignore this question if you so choose... The question:

I've recently read up on biochemistry and in the part about gluconeogenesis there's a chart of the "event" showing that alanine is used somehow in synthesis of cytoplasmic pyruvate from lactate. Now, the book explains that "Alanine and glutamine are the major amino acids exported from muscle for gluconeogenesis." My question is, what other amino acids are used? The chart includes Glu/Gln and Asp/Asn in the TCA cycle, but are there any more? I would appreciate it very much if you could give me an answer, or perhaps refer me to some other "e-Doctor" :) Jack Daw 17:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muscle protein contains many other amino acids besides ala and gln. However, when it is catabolized, most of the other aa's must be transformed into ala or gln in order to be converted to pyruvate and participate in gluconeogenesis. Does that answer your question? alteripse 16:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much yes. Follow-up question: If there is ala and gln in the blood in the event of stress (triggering gluconeogenesis) will muscle still be broken down or will the ala/gln in the blood be used first before turning to muscle "stores" of the aa's? Jack Daw 15:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if I understand your question. Perhaps the answer would be found in one of these generalities, which I think to be true:

1. There is always measurable ala and gln in the blood. The amount there will not support much gluconeogenesis.
2. If a stress signal induces gluconeogenesis, it will involve both liver and muscle, and result in catabolism of muscle.
3. I do not think artificially elevated levels of ala and gln could prevent or suppress the metabolic consequences of a stress signal.

Does one of those items cover it? alteripse 19:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They all add to the information I'm looking for, thank you! Jack Daw 14:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just leaving you a note to explain why I reverted your talk page: the text I removed was a spurious/vexatious request from User:HotHotSoup, the latest sockpuppet of User:PoolGuy, spamming the talk pages of admins (and a few non-admins), and apparently working alphabetically. Contributions of a banned user may be reverted by anyone, but if you would still like the message to be included here, feel free to revert back. Stifle (talk) 17:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i'm asking you only because you are an administrator. i was editing an article and now all my links ("[[ ]]") are underlined. i was wondering how i could correct that. b_cubed 21:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user will not quit. He has vandalized my talkpage numerous times over the past three days

• Today he deleted comments of other users with no explanation[7], protecting my talkpage[8] without any justification, deleting my response to his harassment on my talkpage with the bizarre edit summary "Since you are saying goodbye, let's assume you mean it, eh?", and then leaving this threatening message to intimidate me into leaving[9].

Before that he vandalized my talkpage[10]. Then when I reverted another user assumed he was right and reverted to JzG's version, but realized he was wrong and apologized. I was cordially and said it was alright. JzG has left numerous uncivil comments on my talkpage that can be viewed if one goes through the history of the page. He has also repeatedly been warned. I want him blocked immediately. Tchadienne 22:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit here to the blood type diet article, and after checking my changes, saved it. But it saved it as a "minor" edit. my mistake.. it is not a minor edit. I understand you are monitoring this article? could you turn off the minor edit indicator?

If I am not asking this in the right place, please let me know. Stmrlbs 19:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You choose to either check the minor change box or leave it checked or uncheck it when you save each edit. It is mainly an etiquette issue. Most of us who monitor articles of interest may not look at every edit marked minor, as they are usually simply spelling or punctuation corrections or link insertions. The danger of marking a substantive text change as minor is that someone who disagrees with you will accuse you of trying to sneak in a change "under the radar". Don't worry about the last one, but watch the minor change box on your next edit and you will see what I mean. alteripse 21:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok.. I noticed that my edit here was also marked minor. So I checked my preferences and I see that I had checked the "Mark all edits minor by default".. by mistake. I unchecked it so this won't be the default. sorry.

Tonight I started going through the admin list to see who is and who is not active and got sidetracked by noting who and who is not using edit summaries. Just a bit of constructive criticism: you're extremely low in this regard (at least recently) relative to other admins. I'm kind of leaving this note generically to 1 in 4 people (I very much doubt I'll get to Z :) so hope you take it well. Cheers, Marskell 00:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I just manually looked at the last two hundred where the first fifty showed a lack. No bot. I don't know if I should bother as I'll just wind up with a bunch of "wtf is this?" messages. There is a logic at work though: I've started regularly voting on RfAs and edit summaries is one criteria I use. I thought if that's the case, it's fair to expect it from established admins. However there is no hard and fast rule in this regard and you're perfectly entitled to different criteria. Thanks for your comments. Marskell 08:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, alterprise. No hard feelings, but I want to make sure we're clear. Your suggestion was to accept his apology. Which I'm not going to do, because I don't. I also explained, in my original post on AN/I, why I am not going to ask him not to make any more weird comments. I feel that he is being more and more outrageous in order to goad me into responding to him. Your suggestions are appreciated. Anchoress 03:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a bit of conflict occuring on the Anabolic Steroid page where newer users are erasing entire artics and then continuing the revert them when I revert them. One specific user called 'tomsintown' also doesn't know how to even use the talk page and continues to erase my posts done on the talk page. You need to talk to him about this.Wikidudeman 15:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. No, I have an account on Wikipedia. That's what you type in the search box to get to my talk page, but thanks for your response. How do you know of you have a from your parent (within the context of the above)?68.148.165.213 13:47, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But STI's do not necessarily change genes, nor does it affect the baby prenatally. Can't STI's show up after the baby is born? I.e., affecting a person after the person is out of the womb? Or tube, in the case of invitro babies?24.70.95.203 17:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Ok, can you get a get HSV2 during delievery\prenatally but be a carrier, or for a lack of better words, be able to infect other people, without showing any symptoms, even 'till the day you die'? I know that HSV2, you get get anywhere. Ok, I'll explain my situation. My parents never tested themselves for STI's and they still haven't. I am a virgin. But from the wikipedia article Herpes simplex virus, it says you can can it anywhere, & from what I garner from my talk page, InvictaHOG says that you can get HSV2 and NEVER display symptoms even by the time your dead [And come to think of it maybe even after your dead. Am I right?]. From this information, I just want to stay away from people. But that's so inconsiderate. So maybe as much information you guys could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.100110100 07:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

– ClockworkSoul 22:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply