User talk:BorisTM

Welcome!

Hello, BorisTM, and

to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

]

Thanks. BorisTM 10:23, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Boris, I just used Adobe Illustrator, but I saw your diagram, it's beautiful, make some more pathway diagrams for wikipedia, I personally think their very important.... Adenosine | Talk 00:36, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have been doing this for quite some time, actually for more than 2 years, so i already have many of them and i plan to load them one by one on the appropriate Wikipedia pages, if necessary of course. I also tried to create a color sheme so it's easier for the eye to spot the different elements in the diagrams. ISIS Draw is exelent for drowing chemical bonds, but it had its limitations when i tried to use it for other type of diagrams, such as those for the signaling pathways, where programs like Adobe Ilustrator would be a lot better tool. BorisTM 11:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Boris - Please note that I reverted your "info box" change to Creatine. I agree that using the {Chembox simple organic} template is less-than-ideal, but there is an alternative which is arguably better, and it is certainly much better than the one you seem to be advocating. See Template:BioChemInfoBox for details. You have obviously given some thought to your approach, and I'm sure it works well for you, but it is non-standard, error-prone (in the creatine info box, where is the title?), difficult-to-use for non-experts (e.g. how do you know what the "vocabularly" is?), and has many other drawbacks.

I'd be interested to know why you omitted SMILES (which is widely used), but included EINECS (which was superseded by ELINCS in 1981). Peak 17:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, i was just crusing through your profile. Anyway, i preffer to discuss this and other issues on the

Molecular and Cellular Biology project's page in the "Templates/Infoboxes/Small molecules" section. See you there. BorisTM 17:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry, but I didn't see much there. In any case, I would prefer not to clog a project page with preliminary discussions such as this. Another preliminary question is: why "OrganicBox_PubCnem"? Shouldn't it be PubChem?
On the larger issue, since a template can include other templates, you might want to consider a combined approach. I suppose it ultimately depends on how much variation you think should be allowed between articles. Peak 18:57, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I needed some time to write the reply.
Well, whereelse do you suggest we talk about it? Here, only two of us will discuss it, there - more people will join, more ideas will come.
It has to be OrganicBox_PubChem, i have made a typo and hadn't noticed it, thanks.
I totally agree, there will be articles that will not have some of the info, for an example Glc doesn't have pI so having this in the Glc info table is a waste. BorisTM 19:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Boris
I agree with Peak that your infobox, although a good intiative, it not right at the moment. It is far to big for the purpose it serves and as Peak also mentioned is not standard. I would definately be in favor of including a title containing the name of the compound. I hope you respond soon, otherwise I might change the aminoacids which now have your box back to the standard Chembox. Also, I would like to ask you not to use so many abbreviations in the texts you write because they make reading very difficult.
Reinoutr 8 November 2005

Go ahead, change them. I also promise that i won't tuch any of the existing articles anymore, well all but those that i have already created, such as

MUT, unless being asked for it. BorisTM 16:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

As you might have noticed, I reverted some of your changes by now. Please realize that all contributions are appreciated, both yours and the ones before you. Being a biochemist myself, I certainly hope you will keep adding biochemistry articles to wikipedia so don't be discouraged.Cpt. Morgan 22:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Boris: I am not sure why you think the PubChem CID should be included in the Infobox (the CID is a "Link to Entrez PCCompound"), but if you do, then I would suggest you give the link to the actual page, along the lines of CID 602 from PubChem, that is, using a suitable variant of the following:

[http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/summary/summary.cgi?cid={{{1}}} {{{1}}}] Peak 22:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peak, i think it's important to have a link to the compound's PubChem page because through the links in the top half of that page Entrez offers very convinient way to pull out of the PubMed database (the largest such databasa, i think) all the published articles about the compound. Well, the readers can do the search on their own, i just think that sending them straight to that page will save them time. Wikipedia and PubMed are very powerfull online resources that complement each other and i just want to see them conectect in some way.
I tried to do it this way but it seems when it's part of a template it doesn't work, kinda strange. BorisTM 09:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I have a better understanding of the CID, I agree that PubChem is worthwhile, and I have been using Template:PubChemRow (and Template:EINECSRow], e.g. at Glucose. These are designed to be compatible with your templates. Peak 09:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thaz great.
Peak, there is another thing i would like to discus. It's about the

D- and L-isoforms. BorisTM 14:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

I'll look at the isoforms issue later. In the meantime, please take a look at Template:ATCRow, which allows for conditional inclusion of a row in a table. Consider for example

Epinephrine. At present, the ATC code has to be given outside the infobox. Including an ATC code row in every organic chemical infobox is obviously undesirable. Of course one could have a wide variety of infoboxes, but the technique illustrated in Template:ATCRow can still be used in their construction. Please note that to omit the row, you have to write {{ATCRow|ATC=}}. That is, a null value of the parameter must explicitly be given.Peak 20:38, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

Unfortunately, User:Physchim62 has "vetoed" external links in infoboxes because, as he wrote, they:

.... cause a few problems:

1. External links in tables are badly rendered by some browsers (e.g. Internet Explorer), which expand the links when the page is printed.
2. External links should not be placed "inline" in the article text as they tend to be fragile: instead they should be placed in an External links section at the end of the article (See Wikipedia:External links and the pages referred to from there)
3. The amount of data we could include in tables is almost endless, especially for compounds such as Ammonia: the current form of the tables is the result of a long compromise to try to keep their length to a reasonable level. Data which could be included elsewhere in the article should be; other data can always go on the Supplementary data page.

In the case of PubChem, the third point misses the point, but the first point is a drag.Peak 17:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You added the section ==Regulation== to Citric acid cycle, but, as someone marked, there's nothing in that section... If you wanted to make something a sub-section, you need to use three (===) around the title of the section. I'm not sure what you intended with those edits. Thanks! --AySz88^-^ 06:08, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Every biochemical pathway is regulated, no exception, both by its substrates/products and by some of the many signaling pathways. I could have added info to that part myself, after doing a little research, but decided to leave it open so someone else to do it, sorta "Oh, this article has a 'Regulation'-section, but there is nothing in it. Well, i know something that i can add." And then it'll be easier fot the english native speakers to do that than if i have to do it, makes sence? BorisTM 14:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All right, thanks. --AySz88^-^ 16:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You noted that a prion-capable protein is involved in the synthesis of Vitamin C. I'm not disputing your statement, but I would like to know if there's any published material on this. I would like to read it for my own benefit.

Morwan 21:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

prion-capable protein is involved in the synthesis of Vitamin C - this is not what i ment. I'm sorry if my comment has confused you. -- Boris 22:30, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at

]

Update (on making the EC code optional) at

Template_talk:Protein. --Arcadian 12:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply

]

Superoxide dismutase

Hi Boris!

I'm a chemical engineer doing a masters' in biochem, recently working at a health foods, dietary supplements and cosmetic company. I was suprised to see that SOD is added to cosmetics, and wanted to find out why. I noticed that the WP page said nothing about topical application, so I checked it out on Google Scholar. --Slashme 13:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the link style: The idea is to have a uniform style of article reference. This way, if we decide we now want the journal's issue to be in brackets, or italic or whatever, we just change the template, and all the references change automatically. Also, for someone who is not used to reference styles, you can immediately see which number is the journal issue, and which is the volume (for example) by checking the code.

As for adding a URL, good idea. Check how on Template_talk:Journal_reference. --Slashme 18:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Boris, I just reverted your change to the

]

Hi, thanks for trying to fix the mess regarding this article, it was speedily deleted for being apparent vandalism and a hoax. If you find an article like that again, instead of just blanking it, you should mark it for deletion according to Wikipedia:Deletion policy so that people can find it easier. - Bobet 00:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, sorry for being so direct, i am still learning. This little case once again showed, at least for me, that there has got to be a way to minimaze both the vandal acts and the "unprocedural" attempts, such as mine, to correct them by setting an on-line test of questions related to the editing process, Wiki rules and policy, etc, and after scoring a certain amount of points the anonymous user shoud be allowed to register, set up a name and be part of wiki-editing team. Also there should be a warning system for any registered users, such as myself, who uses any kind of "unconventional" ways. I shall assume that this was a warning of the lowest possible level. -- Boris 15:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People are struggling to get wikipedia to come around to the idea of people having to register before they can edit, let alone making people sit an exam!! --Username132 09:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Username132, i think that Wikipedia is a very very serious on-line project. Do you know where i can discuss these issues because right now i'm just dumping my POVs here and there? -- Boris 13:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So my personal policy on categories is that if an article belongs strongly in multiple categories, I put them in both. Action potentials are the source of signal for almost every form of neuroimaging (even fMRI potentially), and yet they're very important in the field of neuroscience entirely separate from neuroimaging. Similarly I will place someone who is an important biologist and neuroscientist into both categories, even though "neuroscientist" is a subcat of "biologist". Granted, not everyone feels this way, and if you disagree that's fine and we can continue to discuss it.
Now, because APs are the source of several major forms of signal for neuroimaging, I chose to include it. As you pointed out, glycolysis causes the buildup of FDG, but FDG is only one type of radioligand used in one type of imaging. Reductio ad absurdum: everything should be within

for starters. I could be persuaded for axoplasmic transport more easily than glycolysis.
Speaking of which, if you're interested in neuroscience, you should join us over there. :)
If you'd like a more concise explanation for why I didn't put more into the category: I just created the category last night and populated it with the most obvious of articles, and I'm certain I left articles out! Semiconscious · talk 17:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I posted our conversation over on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Neuroscience. The conversation has continued there if you'd like to take a look and add your thoughts. Semiconscious · talk 18:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tnx. I will join you soon. -- Boris 18:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

]

Go for it, i have uploaded the same diagram under a different name Image:MUT.png which is copyrighted. -- Boris 23:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

]

Go for this one too, its the "gif"-version. You can also delete:
1. Image:Arginine 2.png - it is Not Being Used (NBU).
2. Image:Aspartic Acid 2.gif - NBU.
3. Image:Citrulline 2.png - NBU.
4. Image:Creatine.gif - i will replace it with a "png" version.
5. Image:Cysteine 2.png - NBU.
6. Image:Glutamic Acid 2.gif - NBU.
7. Image:Ornithine.gif - i will replace it with a "png" version.
8. Image:TCA_reactions.gif - the "gif"-version of Image:TCA_reactions.png and is NBU.
-- Boris 23:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All the Orphaned, or NBU, images have been speedy deleted. --Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 16:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

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

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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Admrboltz (T | C) 17:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you've made the images yourself and won't mind others using or editing the images, just tag them with {{PD-self}} on the image description page and you're done. - Bobet 17:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How am i supossed to confirm the copyright status of the image when i can't change the images "summary"? I guess i have to wait for you to delete it and after that i will upload the same file but this time it will be tagged as "copyrighted". -- Boris 23:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can hit 'edit this page' (or alt-e) at the top of an image's page, and add the {{

no license}} template. (As long as the image is something you've made.) - Bobet 01:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I could have done it but it said that i could't edit it. Thanks, i just added the copyright tag. -- Boris 01:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The information that memantine is a 5-HT3 antagonist is straight from the prescribing information: "Memantine also showed antagonistic effects at the 5HT3 receptor with a potency similar to that for the NMDA receptor...". Since NMDA antagonism is its primary (and therapeutic) effect I thought this might be relevant. Here's the reference: [1] --User:Karn 04:22 26 Jan 2006 UTC

I would have added a reference to the official prescribing information, but I guess your reference is just as good. If your objection to my earlier edit was merely the lack of a reference, I would have appreciated it if you'd simply added an appropriate reference instead of reverting the edit.

I just added that memantine is being trialed for indications other than Alzheimer's, such as depresssion, glaucoma and neuropathic pain. And I added a reference that I hope that meets your approval. --User:Karn 22:50 26 Jan 2006 UTC

Hey, why are you not willing to finalize that issue? I have proposed a fix for the problem that I feel would look much better, but I need your assurance that it is valid so as not to continue a edit war. --BerserkerBen 04:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are

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. You can get help on image copyright tagging from

]

Image copyright problem with Image:OXTR_structure.png

Thanks for uploading

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 on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are

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. You can get help on image copyright tagging from

]

Regarding the above copyright issues

The Wikipedia cannot use copyrighted images without permission. I would suggest one of two things. One, you could recreate the images as you suggested at first, although this would take some time. Or, secondly, you could contact the copyright holder (i.e. the website) and ask permission to use these images on the Wikipedia. Regardless of whether an organization is free, non-profit, or public, if they exert copyright then it is no different than if a for-profit private corporation exerts copyright. Please see

]

Alright. Now the issue looks a lot clearer than before. Thanks for that and for the links too. -- Boris 13:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Boris, thank you for your comments on the amino acid and DNA images. As for the AAs, I tried to use ball and stick models, but they looked decidedly weird when used in the small size that fits in their infoboxes. I will remake the models that you took down. I would also appreciate further comments on the DNA picture, I think we really need something like that one... Mstroeck 21:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you 100% certain that the painting is about the 1st Balkan war? I wasn't quite sure myself, so I asked a friend of mine to take a look and he said that it can't be the 1st Balkan, because the Turkish soldiers' uniforms looked different in 1912.

Георги Антонов 20:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if the painting was created by Gydjenov or Veshin (as the website says), neither i know if the uniform of the turkish soldiers back in 1912-13 was the same as the one on the painting. All i know is - the enemy soldiers are turks not serbs (you can even see their "fesove"), Bulgarian army never fought with the Turkish army during the Serbo-Bulgarian War.
Now a bit of topic, plz take a look here, we have to do something about it. -- Boris 21:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

?! These are not fezes, these are just hats, the Bulgarians had the same. As for the painting's author, it's Vesin, my mistake. I was not quite certain wether the painting is about the Serbo-Bulgarian war, I just don't have my history schoolbook around but if the hats are your only proof, it's not enough. The fezes were red, these hats are brown. And the uniforms are different, as my colleague said. BTW - If you're Bulgarian, write in Bulgarian (I assume so by the name Boris)

I just found some info on the painting, it was made in 1913 - then it's most probably about the Balkan war, as you said. Thanks for removing it then. By the way, it's really frustrating that there's no info on the painting on the net, at least in Bulgarian!

It is. Well, that's the purpose of Wiki, isn't it? :).
I tried to start a discussion about an issue but i haven't gotten a replay yet. Would you mind to take a look at it? -- Boris 15:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

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

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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at

]

Copyright?

Do you think this image is copyrighted? Can you copyright molecule diagrams? http://www.biotium.com/structures/40037.gif --Username132 09:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting my grammar on talk ATP. I sometimes fire these messages off and get sloppy with the proof reading. I'm sure half my edits are correcting earlier gaffs. Just goes to show that edit counts are worthless. Thanks

]

You are welcome. I make these types of mistakes a lot - i work night shift and althought i try to avoid edditing or adding messages after i come back from work (nightstock at a HyVee store - ughhh), especially when i'm very tired, but sometimes it is so hard to resist, even harder if i decide that the issue is important. -- Boris 20:28, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

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

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

. 10:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading

).

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

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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. BRossow 22:23, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete that image - it is not in use at all. Now about the problem you had with posting here - in the text that you have added initially at the end of the second paragraph there was {&#123TemplateName}} insted of {{TemplateName}}. -- Boris 00:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for alerting me re categories of Neuroendocrinology; this category tree within Neuroendocrinology is not sensible, and it hadn't occurred to me that anterior pituitary hormones would be a subcategory. As for receptors and transporters, in the absence of a category within Neuroscience for these it seemed sensible to move them out of Neuroscience into the most cognate subcategory. However, I'll desist pending a rational recategorisation.Gleng 13:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Image changes to beclometasone & betamathasone - sorry, I was just trying to help :-) It is clearly down to what is best across a number of different browsers: the images had come up as tiny within the table on my Internet Explorer with a screen res of 1280x1024. This was largely because of the wide blank margins the pictures originally had (I.E. correctly zooms pictures in or out with this drugbox) - hence why I cropped them. The red "O" and green "F" I just transferred the style seen in one picture to the other. Many other medicinal drug articles use this same drugbox, it usefully collects chemical names, molecular weights, outline of metabolism and legal/pregnancy status away from the text that can then get on and describe the development, indication and use of the drug.

Given the need to manually split long drug names, is there a best practice in wikipedia as to when to do this, i.e. at what screen resolution should it be assumed most readers have their monitors ? David Ruben ^Talk 13:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS The Drugbox template sets the image width to 220px. David Ruben ^Talk 13:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that you have added "ID"s to various infoboxes. If you have a moment, can you explain it to me? I don't see what purpose they serve. Thanks. Edgar181 12:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In general it is a good idea to tag any important HTML element (such as the infobox table) with "id" b/c that way it is very easy to use javascript to find the element and later to manipulate its content, layout, delete this and that including the whole element. In my case i have javascript files, attached to my "monobook.js", that do this kind of changes, they make all the infoboxes have the same layout so this way i don't have to wonder which one of all the infobox styles to use - i just use the style i like. Compare Heroin without and with (Image:Syn_example.png) these changes. -- Boris 05:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorisTM, have you finished the Fumonisin ? I wish to add info, and I do not want collisions. AbuAmir 14:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. -- Boris 05:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the recent tidy up of reference mark-up in Minocycline. But some queries/thoughts:

1. Reference to published papers should also include the authors, in addition to article title and journal details.
2. Why the use of numerical rather than descriptive tags for each reference name ? It may be initially easier on writing a new article to keep track, but gets progressively confusing as additional references get slotted-in (either all reference numbers need be shifted up, or one accepts Ref No X coming between A & B). The new cite:ref system seems to be creeping in which copes with duplicate references, and allows additional references to be inserted without needing regard to how they are ordered.
3. The "free text image", I get the idea, and quite like the icon - but is having an icon to indicate references having full free text access an accepted wikipedia style ?
   • One might hope that as a default all hyperlinked references (whether to websites or specific articles) are the "full deal". It is only specialist publications that provide either an abstract of another's work (as with PubMed) or of their own pay-for full articles (as with most medical journals).
   • Hence whilst I now know that any PMID reference is only going to be an abstract, my expectation remains that any other reference phrase that identifies a link (e.g. "Report", "PDF", "Letter", "Discussion") on a medical/scientific topic is likely to be to a full item - so is there any need for a specific icon ?
   • Finally given that the icon () is supposed to be indicating openess of a site to show the full text, would a more intuitive icon be  ? David Ruben ^Talk 14:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't like it go ahead and change it. -- Boris 10:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have already updated references as per point 1 above. As for rest, I am undecided by this intriguing novel idea and merely seek to understand the idea further :-) Is this your own idea or have I missed a discussion somewhere ? If widely used, would this have impact on the wikipedia servers; the file size is small, but if every page used it then there would be 2 file-fetch cycles for the server to manage ? Have you had any other feedback from other pages where you have tried this ? Would it be worth submitting this as a suggestion for inclusion as an additional mark-up option in the various cite templates ? David Ruben ^Talk 13:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this your own idea or have I missed a discussion somewhere ?
You mean about the {{ref_N}}/{{note_N}} - style (which includes using the images) or just the idea of using the images. The first one is the result of me trying to find an easy, flexible reference system that doesn't "polute" the main text in view or edit mode with unnecesary code so the people can read and edit easily, and i have picked small pieces from anything that i have come across. The second idea is not mine, it is used by PubMed, i just moved it over to Wikipedia that's all. I haven't had any other feedback yet. I have also icons for free review , free book and free comment - their design don't have to be this way. The only reason i decided to use them is because they make it easier to spot the free resources, for guys like myself who don't live in the academic environment, that offers free access, having this is kinda helpfull.
I'm not sure how well this is going to work considering how wiki renders the pages, it could slow everything down. -- Boris 18:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on my talk page.

Cheers

Ben 15:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another reply for you on my talk page.

Best wishes

Ben

I've updated all the amino acid images. Hope you approve. Details on my talk page.

Ben 21:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on my talk page.

Ben 16:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorisTM. I noticed you changed

]

These are two different compounds. -- Boris 01:30, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorisTM, thanks for your message. I hadn't actually given much thought to the dipropionate ester issue, but you're correct that they are two distinct molecules. Accordingly, I have changed the article back to "beclometasone dipropionate" (and added an explanation to the talk page) to avoid ambiguity. By the way, it's not just "us" pharmacists that call it that – "beclometasone" is the

]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Copyrighted.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{

for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 82.83.98.101 11:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have just seen your chemical structure of Fucitol. You have been drawing the structure in a very unusual way (e.g. omitting stereochemistry, omitting hydrogens on hydroxy groups, using red color for oxygens, using a very low resolution). There are detailed instructions for drawing chemical structures, see [2] or my page User:Cacycle. You could save yourself and others work if you could apply to these rules or let more experienced users draw the images. Cacycle 10:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals about the changes you have made to the infoboxes and data pages for some amino acid articles such as glycine. Please join in. Thanks. --Ed (Edgar181) 18:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Bio-Barnstar
		To acknowledge your contributions to Molecular and Cellular Biology-related articles. Thank you for all of your work and congratulations! --Randy 17:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) -- Boris 23:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently on forced vacation because of illness and have found that editing Wikipedia is a great way to kill time while a recover. I thought that it would be a good idea to set up a cell signaling/signal transduction project to organise and improve the articles on the subject, probably as a daughter project to

]

Hi, Peter. I love cell signaling, actually I love everything that is "cell" related but this is the top, the cell-signaling network does the same job for the cell as the nervous system for the body - evaluation of the signals and making a decision. I don't want to sound in a way that will kill your "daughter project" enthusiasm - you can organize and improve the “cell biology”-related articles without the need to set up this project, so far you have done a great job. Look at the message activity of the mother's project and you'll see why I’m so pessimistic. Plus there is something more about setting up a project besides creating it’s page and it’s categories for the classes of the articles.
I’ve been doing “template” and “small molecules” work lately, and i have the feeling that i've been ignoring the “cell signaling” quite a bit, i also had a plan to start making diagrams with the reaction mechanisms for the enzymes pages, but i put it in the "i'll do it later"-folder and almost forgot about it. Feel free to start with the signaling diagrams, don't hesitate, they will be great additions to all the cell signaling articles. If you have any ideas just drop them on

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Molecular_and_Cellular_Biology, and whoever is interested will get involved. -- Boris 22:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes... the MCB talk page looks quite sad. I've spoken to a couple of people who expressed interest and decided to go ahead and set it up. More out of curiosity for what it would be like really. So there it is

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cell_Signaling. I've looked through some of the existing relevant articles and there is a mountain of work to do. I'll try to find some people to help. Any advice is more than welcome :) Peter Znamenskiy 23:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Stub Categories and Categorisation

Hi,

Re: your message on my talk page ... alphabetisation of categories is somewhat controversial, I believe. I can't remember where I read the matter, but I definitely read a concensus somewhere that they should be in some kind of priority order rather than alphabetical order. As far as the data pages go ... it's not at all my area of expertise, to say the least of it: I do think, though, that they're worth categorising, which is why I've been doing so as I work through Category:Category needed. (For what it's worth, it seems to me to be eminently sensible to have the data pages and to have them categorised as such.) I'll try to remember to alphabetise stub-tags, though. Cheers.

--JennyRad 09:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken that in the case of the chemicals priority makes very little sense ... it's more relevant if you've, say, got a politician who's also a businessperson, so you categorise him as both. Things like that. I'll try to remember to alphabetise in future, though mostly I just copy the categories from the original chemical's page anyway ... --JennyRad 12:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think you could repair the display of the template on the article for

]

Done. -- Boris 19:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks, Boris. ... 

talk 18:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

MDL ISIS Draw 2.5

BorisTM, I may have asked you this question already once, but I keep on having trouble exporting files from ISIS 2.5. It creates a null file on the drive, then stops. At the moment I use PrintScreen to send it PhotoEditor, but I would like to export proper images. Do you have any advice on how to make this work? JFW | T@lk 18:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What ISIS 2.5 does is it creates two files and puts them in the same folder: one has the same name as the one you have given - this is the "zero" file you are talking about and you don't deal with it, the second one is a ".wmf" (windows metafile) and it always has the same wierd name "$$$" - this file is huge and packs a lot of info (for the Acepromazine's $$$ - 501K). You can open this file with any image viewer, but they use it diferently: "InfanView" keeps the original dimentions (320X179 for Acepromazine) and for some reason doesn't allow the use of all that 501K - if you try to increase the dimentions the image gets distorted; MS Paints opens it but doesn't display it right at all. And up till about an year ago i had problem exporting the files and i had to do other tricks like "copy-paste" from ISIS to MS Paint, etc. Heh about 2 years ago i tried to buy Dell comp on-line but for some reason they decided that my acount wasn't reliable or something so they didn't charge it and didn't send me the comp but they still sent me the free Dell printer that was part of the offer. The printer sucked but it came with "Dell Photo Editor" which i had never actually used untill one day while i was trying to find any image editing program, that i might have had on my comp, i kinda came across it for the "second" time so i gave it a shot and it opened the "$$$" and the dimentions were 2800X1700 and i was like "WOAH". So now i use it to manipulate the "$$$", save it as a ".png" and upload it to "WP". All you need to do is find a program that do the same as "Dell Photo Editor". If you ISIS doesn't want to create the "$$$" file then i don't know how to help you.

P.S. How do you export? -- Boris 19:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the chemical formula alternative. I previously had a go using the #IF:, but clearly did not understand either this or template markup sufficiently as it made an awful mess. There are a few things it would be nice to change on the template, could you explain how I might so edit:

1. The DrugBank row is optional and currently uses a 'hiddenStructure' class to achieve this. How can we switch this to the #IF: ? (I think I previously must have miscounted brackets or pipes ? - see this edit)
2. It would be nice to have an additional whole section for additional physical properties. Each parameter can be hidden if its value is not provided (as per point 1 above), however we would also need to hide the header row. To do this one would need test if any of the section's parameters are defined. #IF: does not take operators, as I understand (so no 'Param1 is blank and Param2 is blank'), but can one concanate values (i.e. '(Param1 & Param2) is blank') eg {{#IF: {{{melting_point}}}{{{combustion_point}}} | .... so that if all the parameters are undefined then the header is not displayed ?

Thank you :-) David Ruben ^Talk 23:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You can find the answers to your questions in the latest edit of the drugbox. -- Boris 04:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, how ingeneous - yes I understand process (better) now. As you will see there were some other parameters in occasional use that other editors had requested and I extended the template as per your restyling, and added the extra explanatory description :-)

I really like the alternative to the chemical formula you added - is there though any standard (i.e. does it matter) for the sequence of elements i.e. is C₂H₅OF the same as C₂H₅FO ? David Ruben ^Talk 01:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i use PubChem a lot so i decided to borrow the idea from their element system. I just needed to find structures with different combination of elements to see their priority in the chemical formula. -- Boris 01:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work! --Arcadian 15:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Arcadian, how about you give me some ideas for the pharmacological part of {{OrganicBox_complete}}. You can use {{Add_code}} for that purpose - it is like a template sandbox, you save the changes and then check the results at the template's talk page. -- Boris 00:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some problems with the image you made of the structure of flupentixol: first, the O at the end of the chain should be an OH.

Secondly, the double bond from the carbon opposite the sulfur is twisted so much it almost looks bicyclic; it should be linear. Can you fix those? DS 21:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your first concern has been explained well here (see the newer edit).
About the second one - it is not a double bond, this bond drawing style is to represent a single bond that could be in either L- or D- configuration. Normally swithcing the configuration affects the biological (pharmacological) properties (example - the amino acids), but in this case it doesn't and as either one of Flupentixol's configurations can be used as a drug (including their racemic mixture) i thought it was important to draw them both. -- Boris 00:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed a mistake in Image:Amprenavir.png, which is used in Amprenavir and which you uploaded. The IUPAC name, and other structures I've seen elsewhere, indicate that there are two benzene rings (I've bolded the relevant bits) in this molecule: tetrahydrofuran-3-yl [3-[(4-aminophenyl)sulfonyl-(2-methylpropyl) amino]-1-benzyl-2-hydroxy-propyl] aminomethanoate. However, the diagram gives only one benzene ring. I think the six-membered carbon ring you show at lower right should be a benzene ring. Hope that helps. Carcharoth 11:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. Image has been corected. Thank you for paying attention to the details. -- Boris 00:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I wonder if I could seek your greater expertise on this template again. I tried to add an ifexist: to the first image, as currently a red link is shown if neither an image name is given or the default PAGENAME.png also does not exist either. This worked well for articles with zero or one image, but unpredictable if image and image2 defined (often just the single image2 shown) - test case is for Chloramphenicol and Cyclophosphamide as shown in sandbox

]

Thank you - I had the misfortune to come under User:General Tojo's special attention with a spat of sockpuppet attacks. So thanks for my user-page revertion. Aside from such silly distractions from the real work to be done in wikipedia, did you have any further thoughts on the english-wikipedia/commons issue for image testing - I too had an amateurish dabble with #exist, but got nowhere fast :-) Yours David Ruben ^Talk 18:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is what you need, but check the change. And about the General (Ben thanks for keeping an eye on our user and talk pages) - let him speak. As long as on this talk page he does not delete messages, abuses verbally any of you or misbehave in general (heh, a word play) he can post his opinions. -- Boris 23:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately nolonger seeks default image based on articles name. So yes finds all types (english.wikipedia and commons) images if defined and no red link shown if no image exists. Unfortunately if image parameter is not defined at all, then your coding fails to look for default {{PAGENAME}}.png. Example case is Flucloxacillin where the image Flucloxacillin.png exists but the template markup in the article fails to define the parameter image (currently image shown, yet your code resultant in nothing). David Ruben ^Talk 01:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, sorry man. I give up. -- Boris 02:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need appologise - I've seen you've worked hard on this and shown some interesting effects of #if/#ifexist/#exist - I've tried a number of permutations in "Show preview" and just ended up giving myself double vision and onset of a mild headache - I'll have a further look at the code when my nerves have settled in a couple days :-) David Ruben ^Talk 02:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working lately on something that has relation to our work here on Wiki - a small search tool. I hope it is going to be helpfull. -- 15:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Good idea though to allow 'width2', for historical reasons 'width' needs to be used if this is all that is defined. I see that pipping works just between 2 opinions and a #if is needed if trying to select width2/width/default-value. David Ruben ^Talk 02:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hey boris- i found you through wikiproject biology, and noticed that you were interested in articles on cell signaling. ive been looking for someone to look over my article on the

]

I could if i wasn't working on a small search tool. I'm going to redirect your kind request to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Neuroscience. As for superscript - just put ^{the text} between these two tags , for _subscript you use . -- Boris 18:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We have a new newsletter!
As you've no doubt noticed, there's a new Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject newsletter, which will be sent out about once a month to all WP:MCB members. This newsletter is designed to perform two equally important functions. Firstly (and obviously, perhaps) it will serve to inform the members of the MCB project of such things as important discussions, votes, and article improvement drives. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the periodic correspondance will hopefully encourage a greater level of participation from the MCB community by acting as a gentle reminder of many of the the interesting tasks that are awaiting completion. If you prefer to receive this newsletter in the form of a link, or not receive it at all, you can add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology/Newsletter/Opt Out List .
New project feature: MCB Article Improvement Drive
Have any pet MCB subjects that you think need attention? Have you been longing to be part of a team of like-minded editors working toward a common goal? If so, the good article status . Make your nominations and cast your votes now, because the first article will be chosen on September 1!
Discussion: do we need an MCB director?
In an effort to organize and motivate the MCB activities, it has recently been proposed that a member of the MCB project take the role of "director", who would be responsible for the administrative side of the MCB project, including but not limited to coordinating recruiting efforts, spamming the newsletter, and maintaining the Article Improvement Drive and MCB Portal. A special discussion/vote page has been created for this proposal, and the vote will run until 23:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC), unless the community decides otherwise.
Odds and ends: what else you got?
In an effort to raise our profile and possibly attract some new blood, a shiny new MCB project banner template has been created at {{Template:Wikiproject MCB}}. Please add it to the talk pages of all MCB-related articles.
Signed...
ClockworkSoul 06:39, Sunday August 27, 2006 (UTC)
If you wish to opt out of having the newsletter posted on your talk page in the future, you may add yourself to the Esperanza newsletter .

I do not know if you take requests, but I saw your excellent work on the images for Mifepristone and misoprostol, and thought it wouldn't hurt to request an image for Levonorgestrel. If you have the time, that is. Thank you for your consideration, and your great contributions to wikipedia! --Andrew c 21:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, it was just a matter of a broken link.--Andrew c 21:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Yes, i take drawing requests. -- Boris 11:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boris, I'm curious as to why you changed the info on the

]

Because of this - CID 219030 from PubChem, and this - [3] (which i discovered later). The isomer of omeprazole you are reffering to, and which article i edited is S-omeprazole (which name i assume is pronounced the same way as esomeprazole) and i have no clue as to why it is also spelled (including in the research papers) the same way as the one i'm reffering to. Well, this naming theory came after you messaged here, at the time of my edit all i saw was two compounds that differed by a double bond, i didn't read the Esomeprazole article, so i wasn't aware of the isomer issue. Keep it the way you like it, i don't care. -- Boris 10:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You had objected on my talk page to my tagging an article. Wikipedia is for the general audience and it has to be accessible to the general public. The general idea is that people who are unfamiliar with the subject matter should be able to understand it. My mistake was that I did not mark it with the context template that it really needed rather than the stub and wikify tags. If templates are doing all the work, then there is no need for the article stub, jsut redirect the article to an article with a set of chemical diagrams and references of all the chemicals in the template! The purpose of marking the articles is to invite others to add and improve. It is NOT an act of supervision but a request for help! --- Skapur 20:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cell nucleus The Collaboration of the Month article is cell nucleus . Please help to improve this article to featured article status.

– ClockworkSoul 22:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply