User talk:Lukelahood

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Test[edit]

Test test t esrt

Test 2[edit]

test testest test

Disambiguation link notification for April 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hypoxia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 13:33, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited DUX4, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cleavage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Calpainopathy, from its old location at User:Lukelahood/Calpainopathy. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Sulfurboy (talk) 01:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Calpainopathy has been accepted[edit]

Calpainopathy, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tom (LT) (talk) 06:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Granulicatella adiacens has been accepted[edit]

Granulicatella adiacens, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Tagishsimon (talk) 06:51, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I strongly apologise to bother you, but if you don't mind, I'd like to ask a question regarding the article Multicopy single-stranded DNA. Is msDNA really satellite DNA, i.e. tandemly repeated DNA? According to the paper Repetitive sequences found in the chromosome of the myxobacterium Nannocystis exedens are similar to msDNA: a possible retrotransposition event in bacteria, it is an RNA–DNA satellite molecule, but is it satDNA? Thank you very much. Kind regards, --Pinoczet (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pinoczet, that's a good question. I am not an expert, and I have actually never heard of Multicopy single-stranded DNA. After some reading, these are my thoughts
  • msDNA itself is a misnomer, as it refers to not just the DNA, but the attached RNA
  • accordingly, calling msDNA satDNA is technically incorrect, as it is not entirely made of satDNA (although it does contain it, as does its encoding retron).
  • although msDNA is a molecule (DNA is a molecule, RNA is a molecule, and the combination of them is likely a molecule), to call it a satellite molecule doesn't seem to be appropriate, as I can only find this term when referring to satellite (biology), which has nothing to do with satellite DNA. I do see that it is used in the source you provided.
In summary, although I think it is technically incorrect to refer to msDNA as satDNA, I think it might be referred to satDNA in common practice, as in this source: https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/84982
Thank you for such a comprehensive reply, I greatly appreciate it. I believe your observations are accurate. If I understand correctly, msDNA (its DNA component, to be exact) represents tandem repeats, right? SatDNA is, by definition, tandemly repeated DNA, and except the term you mentioned above, i.e. satellite viral particles, nothing else comes to my mind. Thank you very much. --Pinoczet (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem Pinoczet. It was an interesting topic to read on. Yes, the DNA component of msDNA seems to be satellite DNA, because it is 1)tandemly repeated DNA and 2) not coding for any protein (although there is coding DNA in the retron for reverse transcriptase). According to the satellite DNA page, it seems that satellite DNA was originally observed as a unique band on a DNA density gradient. I imagine that this extrachromosomal DNA would appear on a DNA density gradient much like chromosomal DNA would, so it might even fit the earliest definition, too.
Pinoczet, reading up on it further, it seems that msDNA is not tandemly repeated, but rather found in many copies per genome. So, it wouldn't meet the definition of satDNA as defined on the the satDNA wikipedia page. However, it seems it would meet the above mentioned DNA density gradient definition.

Hi again. I hope you are doing well. I would like to ask a question regarding the article Transposable element. I believe it should include some information on the so-called Class III TEs (see: Pierre Capy et al., Dynamics and Evolution of Transposable Elements, 1998).

If you find some time, could you briefly describe Class III TEs, please? I strongly apologise to bother you, but since you are an experienced Wikipedia user who created many articles of high quality, I decided to rely on your knowledge here. Thank you very much. Kind regards, --Pinoczet (talk) 12:00, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pinoczet. Sorry to say, but I know hardly anything about transposable elements. I just barely remember them from an undergraduate biology class. You'd be best asking others for their expertise.

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 28[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emery–Dreifuss muscular dystrophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TTN.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FSHD article - research support organizations were removed[edit]

I have not looked at the FSHD article for years (looks good btw), and am curious as to what happened to the references to all the other FSHD research support organizations. Currently the article only references two. Gfischershaw (talk) 23:25, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I forget haha.. let me look back.
Thanks for the affirmation. It's definitely a work in progress. Lots of things I still want to fix (mostly my early work).
Lukelahood (talk) 23:27, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From me looking back, mostly after I started working on it, it only referenced one other organization, which was "FSHD Foundation." I probably got rid of it, because the foundation hardly seems to be active, and the webpage doesn't load quickly (a sign in my mind that it is an amateur website). Also it wasn't properly referenced.
Do you know if this is an organization worth mentioning? I am able to find sources that could justify its inclusion.
Lukelahood (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
fshfriends.org
fshdglobal.org
Gfischershaw (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Great, both are added now, with appropriate citations. I added Solve FSHD too.
Lukelahood (talk) 02:58, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. To be a little more complete and tie into Solve FSHD, you could add FSHD Canada Foundation (fshd.ca), run by Neil Camarta and Craig Kelley. Neil collaborates with Friends of FSH Research on projects, as does Chris Carrino (https://fshfriends.org/research/funding-partners). Neil and Chip are good friends, and Neil helps with Solve FSHD. There is also the Wellstone center in Seattle (part of what Senator Wellstone set up years ago), co-chaired by Chamberlain and Tapscott (https://www.seattlemuscle.org).
Gfischershaw (talk) 15:24, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this list should get much larger. See an example at Epilepsy#Support_organizations, which has good article status. There, they list approximately one organization per country. With FSHD Canada, I can't find any sources (their website itself isn't an appropriate source). The FSHD global organization you notified me of was worth including, because it has several covering articles from "The Australian" newspaper. I think Solve FSHD is notable and worth including, because its donor is the CEO of a well-known company, and I believe that is one of the largest (or largest) donations in history. It also is apparently covered by a global news source. FSHfriends is hard to include, but I think we'll leave it for now. Really, it only has a single independent article covering it, and that's from a local newspaper. This one might get deleted eventually. As for the Wellstone center in Seattle, I cannot find any news sources covering their impact on FSHD, only MD in general.
Lukelahood (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the testing section, unless it is too specific for your overview, you might want to refer to the Jones epigenetic test (https://myfshd.org), which differentiates between FSHD1 and FSHD2 (the latter being sort of a joke, as there are many, many variants). It is not performed in a CLIA lab, but people outside the U.S. don't particulaly care about that.
Gfischershaw (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for mentioning this. I've just provided mention of its method (bisulphite sequencing) in the article, although the only medical sources covering it are from Jones himself, and they are primary sources. It isn't within the scope of wikipedia to mention a specific clinical study or vendor of tests; we'll have to wait for the test to become validated or commented on by a secondary source.
Lukelahood (talk) 11:35, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, Lukelahood

Thank you for creating Pseudohypertrophy.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:05, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lukelahood, I hope you're doing well. I'm not an expert in this field, but the article Tandem repeat seems to be missing the important information. Shouldn't satDNA be at least briefly described there (e.g. in the Terminology section)? Cf. Satellite DNA. I'm not sure, however, how exactly to solve this problem. Since you've created another article on the subject, I decided to contact you; I hope you don't mind it. Kind regards, TaurenMoonlighting (talk) 22:15, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the Tandem repeat article to reflect my best understanding of it. Lukelahood (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and question[edit]

Wanted to say thanks for the many great edits to the FSHD and DUX4 pages. I can't believe I haven't looked at the article much in the last couple of years.

I'm still digesting the many changes you've made, but I have a couple of observations. There is no mention of Reachable Workspace, which is now a primary outcome measure for current trials, and the chronology has not been updated with key papers/findings since 2014. I am curious how you confirmed all of the images you've uploaded are licensed as Creative Commons.

I see your user page lists FSHD as your primary interest. May I ask why? FSHD is a focus of mine as well. Theflyer (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Theflyer. Thanks for all the work you put into the page before I started. The page helped bring me up to speed on the disease as I first became aware of it. The chronology I haven't added to at all. I have removed some of the elements from the timeline, I have trimmed some of the elements, and I moved some of the elements into the genetics section as explanation for the disease mechanism. As time has gone on, some of the discoveries have seemingly become irrelevent. For example the PAX gene seemed to have received a lot of focus prior to the 2010 article explaining the epigenetic regulation of DUX4, but is not as focused upon now (although this is hard for me to judge).
The pictures on there are either 1) on the page from before me working on it, 2) from journal articles the have the proper version of creative commons licensing (just follow the citation), 3) are from articles that have expired copyright, such as the original pictures from Landouzy and Dejerine, and international publciation, or 4) were generated/taken by myself, such as the scapula-to-scapula scapulopexy.

Lukelahood (talk) 19:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your efforts on the page. Will transition to using the FSHD talk page for topical discussion. I'm trying to reinvigorate the group of researchers and advocates we gathered back in 2014. The images you've added are great. I appreciate the confirmation about the licensing as I wasn't able to quickly identify the CC license on the more recent photos that came from research papers. Theflyer (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At least for one of the articles, I'm only able to see the CC BY 4.0 specification when I download the article as a PDF; I can't find it in a web version.
That sounds great about sparking the collaboration. Lukelahood (talk) 18:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lukelahood&oldid=1197730594"