User talk:Edgar181/Archive9

Please read before editing:

1. Please add new comments to the bottom of the page. You can use the "new section" button above to start a new topic.
2. In general, I will respond here to comments, rather than on your talk page, so that the conversation isn't scattered.
3. If you want to know why I blocked your IP address, you have to let me know what IP address you are referring to.
4. If you want to know why I deleted an article, you have to let me know what article you are referring to.

---

Archives

Oct 2005 - May 2006 Jun 2006 - Sep 2006 Oct 2006 - Feb 2007 Mar 2007 - May 2007 Jun 2007 - Sep 2007 Oct 2007 - Dec 2007 Jan 2008 - Mar 2008 Apr 2008 -

Vandalism

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage! Deflagro C/T 02:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Recommended administrators

Hello, i have created a section on my userpage for other users to find administrators recommended by me. I would like you to add yourself to the list so it can have your unique signature! Please use ~~~ to add yourself, as this will omit the date. If you do not wish to be on the list, thats okay! I respect the choice of every administrator/user on wikipedia. Have a nice day :-) TheProf - T / C 22:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

New chemical

Hello, the Roasted barley tea article mentions a chemical called alkylpyrazine. Is this a real chemical and do you have the expertise to create a stub about it? Badagnani (talk) 05:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

"Alkylpyrazine" is not a specific chemical because alkyl refers to a series forming a chemical group. If there are enough common characteristics of alkylpyrazines as a group, it may be worth an article though. I'll look into it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

They seem to be important aroma compounds, so I have now created alkylpyrazine as a stub. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Ed - Thanks for the rollback tool! I'm not the biggest vandal-zapper, but I do revert when I see it, so I'm sure it will come in handy! -- Quantockgoblin (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Can I get rollback too? :) While I don't actively hunt for vandalism, I revert it when I see it, and rollback could be helpful for that sometimes. --Itub (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Certainly! Sorry, I should have included you among the others. You've got it now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! --Itub (talk) 12:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for this. Prashanthns (talk) 14:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

207.61.101.2

Hi, I was just on one of my school's computers and I attempted to edit my userpage without being online then I saw that the IP was disabled. I just wanted to let you know that IP 207.61.101.2 is an entire school's IP address and it might have been one person that vandalized (I'm assuming it was vandalism) a page on Wikipedia. Russell High School is the name of the school which IP was blocked. The reason why I am contacting you is because it said that you were the one that blocked the IP. Please remove the ban. Loghead1 (talk) 16:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Because of the repeated vandalism coming from that IP address, it has been blocked mulitple times for long durations. It is well within Wikipedia's blocking policy to prevent editing from IP addresses that have been the source of that much vandalism. To protect Wikipedia, I don't think it would be a good idea to unblock. The current block is a "soft block" which only prevents anonymous editing and allows those who wish to contribute constructively, such as you, to do so. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

True, true, and I only use my username anyways. Thanks! Loghead1 (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Missing chemical structure

Hello. When I have checked the article Flunixin Meglumine, there was no chemical structure added. :-) Carlo Banez (talk) 14:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I added images and converted it to the combination drugbox. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, but now I'm rethinking the combo drugbox considering the meglumine part is not an active ingredient. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ceftriaxone structure

I just noticed that there is an error in the structure image you posted for ceftriaxone. On the left side, the oxygen connecting the six membered ring to the cephalosporin nucleus should be a sulfur. Thanks for you work. Bdeyes (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

You're right, thanks for catching it. I have fixed it now. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Curious about Generalized Verma module del/restore

Howdy, I was curious why Generalized Verma module was deleted and then restored. Was it to remove vandalism or something? I had a vague memory I had edited it, but I am not in the history now. Quite possibly it was another article, or part of my cleanup of "we have 30 articles on the same concept, most of which are linked from this article" that didn't require any edits. Just want to make sure I understand how it works, and that I didn't make any edits that needed removal :) JackSchmidt (talk) 16:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

A user added to that article a phone number and an invitation to make prank calls to it. The same thing was done to multiple other articles until he was blocked from editing. I wanted to eliminate those edits from the visible histories of the articles. The only way for an admin to do this is to delete the whole article and then to restore all but the offending edits. This is what occurred at Generalized Verma module. There were no edits by you deleted from the article's history. I hope this explains it. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation and for checking the history. Crazy people out there; thanks for tidying up after them! JackSchmidt (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

My edits to your userpage

I've edited your shortcuts list as the {{shortcut}} template was not being used correctly, per CAT:SHORTFIX. You may wish to change how you have shortcuts listed on your userpage, as I think some of the edits I made means that the links no longer show up. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 14:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know I wasn't using it "properly" but it was an easy way to get what I wanted. I guess I'll have to do it the hard way now. Thanks for letting me know. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:31, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Redirect needed

Hi, can you make a redirect from diethylhexyl adipate to the proper compound? Is it Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate? Badagnani (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Missing chemical structures

Hi, could you please add chemical structures to the following:

• Bosutinib
• Indacaterol
• Axitinib

There are no chemical structures in these articles. :-) Carlo Banez (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, done. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sucralfate

Do you think, it is also possible to draw the structure of sucralfate? It looks quite complicated to me. ;-) The best model might probably be this one (IMHO better than on PubChem). --Leyo 20:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I've added a structure that is based on both Chemical Abstracts and the Merck Index. I'm not quite sure how to represent the 8 Al(OH)₃ groups. They are not covalently bound to the disaccharide portion, but the both Chem Abstracts and the Merck Index indicate that each of the is associated with one of the 8 aluminium groups that are part of the disaccharide. Merck Index just writes out that part in text as SO₃[Al₂(OH)₅]. I've decided to represent it in a bit of an ambiguous fashion. The online databases PubChem and Drugbank have structures that don't make too much sense chemically. I've seen this before with complexes with parts that are not covalently associated -the result is automatically generated structures that are a bit confused. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Why is there so much water? 14 waters if I'm not wrong. Water of crystallization? --Rifleman 82 (talk) 20:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the material was quite hydroscopic and the number of water molecules associated with it would vary depending on manufacturing conditions, crystallization method, humidity upon storage, etc. There's quite a bit of polarity in that beast of a molecule. -- Ed (Edgar181) 23:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, the structure looks good IMHO. When looking at aluminium hydroxide, it would not be surprising if sucralfate is quite hydroscopic. --Leyo 00:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I saw the pubchem page and from the SMILES I copied, all the water were just that - free water. Usually I would just omit these waters of crystallization. But, I see that the image here is a bit different. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 01:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Diagram

Hi, can you add a diagram for Retinyl palmitate? Badagnani (talk) 00:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this page should just redirect to retinol. Some context would be the mono, di, trisodium citrate pages. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 01:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The palmitate form is widely used as an ingredient in processed foods. Badagnani (talk) 03:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

This is one that could probably go either way. I don't think it would be bad to merge into retinol, but I'd be inclined to leave it as a separate article considering its distinct uses as a food additive and as a pharmaceutical treatment for vitamin A deficiency. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

New articles needed

Can you help create stubs for these, or are they synonyms for articles we already have?

• Lauryl glucoside
• Amidoamine
• Dimethylaminopropylamine

Badagnani (talk) 03:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I created stubs for all three. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

For doing such a great job at WP:AIV that i just had to send you a message. It was you who finally blocked this pest after numerous vandal edits and he was actually calling for it! And i was waiting and waiting and waiting and it looked like from here at 14:00 UTC all the admins were asleep or if they were in your land they had a sleep in. Not you, you were wide awake there and i commend you for being there when admins were needed! I know there are only 1500 of you around the world but you never know when it might get busy. Thanks again and you deserve a barnstar. Cheers Roadrunnerz45 ^{(talk 2 me)} 05:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words and the barnstar. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Salute day

Thank-you for putting an end to that entire issue. I don't think that my comments should have been removed from the discussion page, espacially since it says not to remove them. But I do think that this was the right choice considering the threatening attitude of the Baseball person.

Here were my final comments that were removed. maybe you can put them back.

• • • • • Tovarish is a word that exists, yet you can't find it. Grab a dictionary and look up Samovar. You will find the definition to be a Samovar. Not very helpful, yet that is a Published Source. I think that you are beginning to make my point for me, yet it is moot as I have removed the entire article. Feel free to bully someone else. Oh, by the way, First Amendment day just came and went. It started much the same way, and is only just now getting any published pieces after six years, (it is actually 9 years old, but recognized as six) My point is that there is not a Wikipedia Article on it....maybe you should create one.

Gary De Pury 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again

Thanks

Thanks for unblocking me, but you should think about blocking User:Smsarmad before I'm very sure he's the one who vandalized the articles previously Special:Contributions/81.149.22.123 because when I corrected the errors, he reverted them back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.187.213 (talk) 20:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be best for both of you talk to each other in a civil fashion rather than simply reverting each other and accusing each other of vandalism; or perhaps seek a third-opinion about your dispute (see Wikipedia:Third opinion). -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Two weeks ago, this person changed many of these articles that have always stated that the people in question are Shi'a Muslims. Now that I reverted these edits, he reverted them back and had the nerve to report me. This user should be blocked from disruptive editing and POV pushing, at least temporarily. 77.42.187.213 (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried talking with this person? -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and as you can see from my talk page and his, this is someone who is very ill-intentioned. 77.42.187.213 (talk) 20:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I meant talking about the actual point of disagreement. I see your name calling and accusations, but little else. -- Ed (Edgar181) 21:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I am surprised that you unblocked the above anon editor despite of uncivil behavior and I would call personal attacks he made at me, as you can see at my talk page and edit summaries which I think you already have seen. --SMS ^Talk 22:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It wouldn't be the first time that I've been too lenient. If the user returns and continues the same behavior, please let me know I and will promptly reblock. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Denenrs2

User:Denenrs2 has just appeared and recreated the page created by User:Denenrs who you blocked a short while ago.--Doug Weller (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

He is now blocked. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

User:TheWarrior45

hey dude i don't know why you deleted my page it was my page and i really want to know why you deleted it because it was about stuff that i knew was true well not Bush's wife being 4 months pregnet that was not true but still i want to know why you deleted it--TheWarrior45 (talk) 21:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)TheWarrior45

I've deleted it again, for obvious reasons. If you re-create it, you'll be blocked from editing. -- Ed (Edgar181) 00:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 02:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Smsarmad

Please block User:Smsarmad indefinitely. See this and this. 77.42.190.154 (talk) 15:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to look at the edit summaries of this anon, who seems to be the same one who was unblocked by you a day ago. --SMS ^Talk 17:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course I'm the same. Why else would I be writing on Edgar's talk page? 77.42.190.154 (talk) 17:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Ths user has decided to move on with his POV pushing and vandalism. He has to be blocked. 77.42.190.154 (talk) 17:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)