User talk:FrozenMan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Invitation[edit]

GLO1 Homo sapiens small fast.gif

Thank you for contributing to our articles. If you are interested in making more contributions on cell biology and biochemistry topics, you might want to join the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject (signup here). You will be most welcome. - Tim Vickers (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


October 2010[edit]

Information.svg Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thank you for your contributions. I left a few comments here and made some changes. You are very welcome to improve those articles. Few editors work in this area. More hands are needed. Biophys (talk) 03:07, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Clathrin[edit]

Thanks for your edits to clathrin, do you think you can cite a source for the information you've added, so that others can verify what you've written? Thanks SmartSE (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the very late reply. If you got the info from the RCSB Protein Data Bank website, can you add references to the article so that readers can see where you got it from? Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners should help if you're not sure how to do it. If you don't understand, drop me another note and I'll try to get back to you a little quicker than this time! SmartSE (talk) 21:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Drugbox on Tylenol[edit]

Hi! I removed the drugbox you added to Tylenol because it is already on Paracetamol and maintenance would be difficult, as I noted on Talk:Tylenol#Drugbox removed. Please tell me if you disagree. Thanks for your work, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


LA and LB[edit]

Hi there. From where did your new figures originate for Lewis acids and bases? And the statement that "there are generally thought to be four types of Lewis Bases and 6 types of Lewis Acids."? --Smokefoot (talk) 13:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey! Recently I have been trying to understand why AlCl3 will remove a Cl from CH3C(=o)Cl in the Friedel-Crafts Acylation. But so far, I have found no good explanation of Lewis Acids strengths, or even classification! We learn all about pKa in Organic Chemistry, and why certain B/A Acids are stronger than others (Size, Electronegativity, Hyperconjugation and Resonance Stabilization of Conjugate-Bases, etc)... but I have never seen anything that describes that for Lewis Acids and Bases. The Hardness scale is not very well documented -- even in wikipedia. If you know a better website please direct me so I can read some more. But as of now the best one I have found (and to answer your question, the one that I got the images from) is:

http://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/12_lab/lab.html

Hope this helps! -Evans

looks like that source is owned by someone (i.e., a .com source), which probably means that you need to be careful about copying their graphical work. Presumably they got their ideas from some textbook, which I encourage you to pursue. Otherwise your contributions will be removed by me or some other editor concerned about copyright violations. I would be glad to help. Again: editors here, many pretty good organic chemists, get nervous about sources with a .com.
with regards to your question on the Friedel-Crafts reaction, recall that the acylium ion (RCO+) is heavily stabilized by the "nonbonding electrons" on oxygen. The nature of "AlCl3" under these conditions is quite unclear, but most chemists pretend that it is a monomer. There is probably a crystal structure of an acylium salt, possibly with AlCl4- as the gegenion. We need an article on acylium ions, BTW.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
The question still remains, how do you determine Lewis Acid strengths? If you are given a compound and asked about its pKa, there is a good chance that you could make an accurate guess based on (as I said earlier) things like Size, Electronegativity, Hyperconjugation and Resonance Stabilization of Conjugate-Bases, etc. But that description only works when you are looking at HYDROGEN DISASSOCIATION. What are the factors that determine ELECTRON PAIR REACTIVITY? Does anyone know?
All I was really going for in adding the section on categorizing Lewis Acids and Bases was putting up a flag to see if anyone knew about them -- or could make it more clear to me (and anyone looking at the page) how exactly we can predict their reactivities?

Drago-Wayland equation? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 05:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit EMF summaries[edit]

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.

I couldn't see the point in your changes to Electromotive force, and there was no edit summary to give me a clue, so I reverted. You're up next, per WP:BRD. Dicklyon (talk) 18:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

  • The reason that I changed the definition of electromotive force from the quotation "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow." to voltage, is because a potential difference is "that which tends to cause current (actual electrons and ions) to flow." I just went back and took another stab at it by adding a symbolic representation, giving units, and putting in a blurb that emf is not a "force" because that could confuse people who are just learning the topic for the first time! If you want to take a look at some of the other E&M pages, it would be great to get another set of eyes on the changes I have made. I have really been working hard to go through the E&M pages and fix up the definitions to make them more standard (both in terms of terminology and layout).

August 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Nabla symbol, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. I think you got the definition of del wrong, and there was no clue why you added that, so I reverted it. Dicklyon (talk) 18:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Links[edit]

Hi FrozenMan. A couple of tips, based on what I see in your edits:

  • Links should be added to the "see also" section of an article only if there is not already a link to the topic within the body of the article, and one cannot easily be added. A perfect article would have no see also section; everything would be linked inline.
  • Links do not have to be piped, and should not be piped unless necessary. eg. [[ductal gland]] is fine. There is no need to write [[Ductal_gland|ductal gland]]. Spaces in link targets are fine. Case is significant, except that the first letter can be either upper or lower case with no effect. Suffixes can be added by putting them just outside the square brackets, with no space: [[gland]]s produces a link like this: glands.

--Srleffler (talk) 06:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the heads up!

All files in category Unclassified Chemical Structures listed for deletion[edit]

One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 17:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC).

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Baddeley working memory.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Anatomy Wikiproject![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Anatomy! We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of anatomy articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are involved in editing anatomy articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing wikipedia articles are:

Sobo 1909 589.png
  • Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
  • You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing anatomy articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
  • We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
  • Lastly, why not try and strive to create a good article! Anatomical articles are often small in scope, have available sources, and only a limited amount of research available that is readily presentable!

Feel free to contact us on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. I wish you all the best on your wiki-voyages!

I've been noticing your recent edits, and they're much appreciated! If you have time I'd be very grateful if you could update your chances with a source, too. Unfortunately so much of the anatomical information on wiki is unsourced, but thanks for your numerous recent changes. Cheers, --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fossa (anatomy), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fossa navicularis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

- It's ok bot, the disambiguation page was intentional.

Thanks & Sources[edit]

Hi FrozenMan! Thanks for your many edits to anatomy articles! I'd be very grateful if you could provide a source when making a change -- not because they're incorrect, but because one of the principles of Wikipedia is verifiability, and in the future it will be very useful to any editors who want to improve the article or explore a topic further. From an academic point of view it's also pretty interesting, because exploring sources is usually quite educational. One method I use to make sourcing very easy is to have a notepad file on my computer of common sources I use, such as this:

<ref name=GRAYS2005>{{cite book|last=Drake|first=Richard L.|title=Gray's anatomy for students|year=2005|publisher=Elsevier/Churchill Livingstone|location=Philadelphia|isbn=978-0-8089-2306-0|coauthors=Vogl, Wayne; Tibbitts, Adam W.M. Mitchell ; illustrations by Richard; Richardson, Paul|page=951}}</ref>

That way, I can just copy/paste the source when editing and change the 'page' number, and voila! Easy

Thanks again for your edits! --Tom (LT) (talk) 05:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment in the middle of Fossa (anatomy)?[edit]

Hi FrozenMan! I stumbled upon the article for fossa (WikiLink above), and noticed a comment request, with link to another page, in the middle of the article space, rather than its talk page. I think it was you who added it, but could be wrong. I used the page history to help me figure this out. Anyway, Is it OK if I add it on the article's talk page, or if it was you who wants this request completed, would you rather post it to the article's talk page yourself? Here's the comment request (including page that was linked to), I removed:

"Someone should go through this page and add the rest... (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=fossa)"

Thank you! RupJana (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes, to the message you left on my talk page. Re: other editors will see it. A comment can't be in the article itself, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, where people read it too gain knowledge. As I did. When I saw your comment I knew it didn't belong there because I read the basic guidelines on editing, but I didn't plan to edit any on that day.

I edit Wikipedia a few times a month at most (a bit more just recently), but read it more often that, to gather information. There are more people who do the same, but most don't edit articles at all and wouldn't know what to do, or even understand what you put in the middle of the article.

A comment telling others to do something to an article they most likely came to learn about, would put them off . I t to other editors in an encyclopedia, or even in a published medical journal. The talk page of an article, or specific project page; for example, "Medicine", is where these type of comment should go. I think they're called "portals", the special projects, such as "medicine" as well as a host of others. Especially if you don't have time to do it/something yourself, just post to the talk page and someone is bound to show up, and help add those links and more.

Though chances may be slim, other editors more interested in Wikipedia:Gnome work, and/or knowledgeable in that subject, will know where to look, and may welcome the job quickly enough. I asked you if you wanted to move it yourself out of courtesy to you, and so wrote you on your talk page so you wouldn't have to wonder where your comment request went. Also to help myself learn to use the talk pages of others, and to sign my posts/comments.

With all the fancy Wiki-markup language, and so many policies, it can be daunting. Each editor will add to articles as he/she deems fit to do so. Many just edit spelling/grammar, others do what is called "clean up".

Again, and getting on with the subject.... adding it to the talk page is the best way IMO, and where editors will' find it.


I will now sign this post with four tildes, and it will be magically formatted with my user ID, user talk page link, and date and time (I hope). Good luck editing! RupJana (talk) 09:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Tool for creation of PBB infoboxes[edit]

Hi. Thanks for creating Monocarboxylate transporter 2 and Monocarboxylate transporter 3. In case you haven't seen this, please check out BioGPS which automates the creation of Gene Wiki articles including the {{GNF Protein box}}. Type in the gene symbol or Entrez gene id, "search", select the human gene, change the "current layout" (near the top right hand side) from "My layouts" to "GeneWikiGenerator". If the corresponding Wikipedia does not yet exist, it will allow you to create both the PBB template (top) and article (bottom). This tool can save you an enormous amount of work compared to creating these articles manually. Cheers Boghog (talk) 07:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

omg. amazing. can you recreate the ones i made because im not sure that all the info i entered was correct. FrozenMan (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

User:ProteinBoxBot occasionally updates the contents of PBB templates. If there are any mistakes, these will be eventually corrected. Boghog (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Locus coeruleus[edit]

The locus coeruleus derivative image looks good.

I previously marked-up the same area on the very low magnification micrograph (commons), as you may know. If you click the link and mouse over the image you'll see annotations I added when I created the image.

I changed the authorship on your upload. It is a derivative work and (generally speaking) should be categorized as such for two reasons:

  1. If the original should have (copyright) problems the derivative would be problematic. This is important so that the WMF does not get into trouble.
  2. The author of the original should be recognized as per the licence.

I can tell you with certainty that the original has no problems -- as I created it. But you cannot say that... as you probably don't know me yet and don't know where the image came from.

In any case, it is nice to see another person at WP:MED. I have hung out there for a long time-- but haven't spent as much time there recently due to other commitments. Nephron  T|C 22:33, 3 April 2015 (UTC)