Heh, no worries. I didn't know it could do that. J.delanoygabsanalyze 22:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
J.delanoygabsanalyze has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hiya. I'm going to have some free space soon, as one of my coachees is going to request adminship (assuming that they are succesful of course!). I'd be happy to mentor you, but I will give some words of advice now. You are some way from a succesful RFA at present. With just over 1,000 edits and about three months of active contributions (I appreciate your account is a lot older) it will be some time. You contributions so far are excellent, but cuurent "RFA Standards" (by which I mean the miniumum that a significant proportion of the community find acceptable) would be 4-5 months tenure, 3,500+ edits and plenty of contribution in the project space (WP:AIV, WP:RFPP, nominating for CAT:CSD, WP:AFD etc. etc.) I'd also counsel at this stage that you should seek to get your edit summary use to 100%, and wait at least 10-12 weeks before another RFA. I'd also like to advise that being an admin is not something special - please don't edit for the sake of adminship or you will be disapointed!! I hope that helps, and please reply on my talk if you'd like to progress this further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedro (talk • contribs) 07:14, 18 April 2008
Hello, Cyclonenim. You have new messages at Stepshep's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Cyclonenim. You have new messages at Stepshep's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky
Hi. Why exactly is search for 'distillery' redirecting to "Lisburn Distillery F.C." and any attempts at reversion creating a warning message? I believe the word distillery does not exclusively mean the company, or does it? Elncid (talk) 11:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted this user on your page today for vandalism I suspected he was a sock of Icecreamarmageddon (talk·contribs) and aske the blocking admin to have a look, as the only edits thet made was to mine and your pages. On the talk page of BanditoLoco he has said the Icecreamarmageddon has multiple accounts. Have you had any dealings with that editor. I am about to file a report for WP:SSP and would like your input if you know any other accounts thanks. BigDuncTalk 19:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Thanks and sorry if I sounded a bit rude... I was desperately searching for distillery on the net and was quite put off when wikipedia turned out to redirect it to that plant. So, thanks again. I am quite new to all this stuff so plz forgive me [:)] Elncid (talk) 18:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey how did you get all that stuff into your user page? Elncid (talk) 02:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
hey! I meant all the 'home', 'talk', 'about me' etc. ones.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elncid (talk • contribs) 18:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello yet again. I regretfully inform you that the bot we were using to update the user status at Wikipedia:Highly Active Users, SoxBot V, was blocked for its constant updating. With this bot out of operation, a patch is in the works. Until that patch is reviewed and accepted by the developers, some options have been presented to use as workarounds: 1) Qui monobook (not available in Internet Explorer); 2) User:Hersfold/StatusTemplate; 3) Manually updating User:StatusBot/Status/USERNAME; or 4) Not worry about it and wait for the patch to go through, which hopefully won't take long. If you have another method, you can use that, too. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Useight (talk) 22:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Cyclonenim, and thank you for your recent participation in my RfA, which was closed per WP:NOTNOW after reaching a vote tally of 5/15/2. While I am disappointed in the outcome, I understand that it - as well as the comments left by yourself and others - was in the best interests of Wikipedia at this time. I plan to take everything that was written to heart and improve myself here on Wikipedia with a goal of perhaps accepting a nomination again in the future, should someone choose to nominate me. As a way of gathering further feedback, I have created a page in my user space for other editors to leave comments about things that they might have observed during my RfA and to continue my "education process," as it may be considered. If you would like to contribute to that page, it may be found here. Again, thank you for participating and I appreciate your comments! --InDeBiz1 (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Now, I think major expansion and revamp of polyclonal response is over, so I invite you to go through it if and when you find time. I've uncluttered the reference that you'd pointed out. Just very much, out of the way, you could try narrowing the header that you have on your pages, as (at least on my browser with current settings) it was exceeding the width of one screen. Of course, you may also try getting it into two rows. Thanks for all the support for the "Polyclonal response" article.
"Hi there, I can seem to make it smaller but I can't figure out how to centered it when i've done that (tried using DIV's and centre tags) so if you could have a look at it (User:Cyclonenim/NavBox) and make changes that you seem suitable which still look neat and tidy (i.e. centered) then that'd be grand. I'll have another look at polyclonal response too. Regards, CycloneNimrodtalk?contribs? 10:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)"[reply]
To be honest, I don't know a thing about HTML, but I think, and your method of preparing the navbar is different from mine. I somehow managed to make the changes you desired by adding 'align="center"' at the right place (after "cellspacing=1"). I have prepared both the formats I'd recommended to you. You can try copy and pasting the following scripts, which you can also find at my sandbox:
Hope this helps, and that I can learn more about HTML in the technically sound fashion. All the best.
PS: Do let me know when you're done with this script, so that I can delete your bavbox from my sandbox. somehow, I wouldn't find it appropriate to have your Navbox lurking in my sandbox ;)
Thanks for incorporating the changes I'd introduced in the navbar. Well, the advice part pertains to the Rfa (I suppose adminship) aspect. If you're aspiring to get into the medical profession, you might not be able to do justice to your adminship (which could be alright), or your profession (which could be disastrous). So, please do tread with caution. I'm telling you this with my own personal experience—Wikipedia can be very addictive at times, and definitely more so with fresh adminship. By the way, I came across this Rfa thing at your "Review me" page.
Hope you don't mind and consider this as excessive interference with your decision-making.
"Sorry I don't quite understand what you're trying to put across! I'm not entirely sure how me being an admin would affect my career as a doctor, nor the other way round. There are several administrators on the En Wiki who are members of the medical profession. Would you like to clarify your point a little? Sorry! Regards, CycloneNimrod talk?contribs? 11:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)"
I was just trying to point out that medical course (may be a bit more than the profession itself) tends to be quite hectic. If you feel you'd be able to balance out the two, that's good. That was just a suggestion with no intention to offend or provoke you in any way. Regards. —KetanPanchaltaLK 16:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did get your point, except for what "PBL" stands for. Guess, it could be standing for problem-based learning. So, what are the other course options available to you to become a doctor (asking just out of curiosity as in India, the only way is to do an MBBS).
Good there was no misunderstanding of any sorts.
And on this note, do you mind signing my guest book?
But, what about the practical (clinical) aspects in PBL? Would you be entitled to the same privileges (in terms of license to practice) as an MBBS or MBChB doctor? And, what would be the name of the degree that you'll be awarded? Yes, somehow I missed your signature on the watchlist. Thanks, and of course, you got to be the first to sign my newly created guest book. —KetanPanchaltaLK 17:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cyclonenim, for participating in my recent RfA, which recently passed with 81 support and 1 neutral !votes. I appreciate all the support and constructive criticism offered in my RfA and I thank you for taking the time to !vote in my nomination. I feel so honoured to be trusted by so many of you and please, if you have any advice, comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page.
There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at WP:GA.
The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11)
The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions.
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
Giggy (talk·contribs) (a.k.a. Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk·contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to Giggy (talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include:
This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
New GA Review Process - Review Subpages
In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable.
When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at WP:GAN in the appropriate category.
When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the Good Article criteria, as well as to the Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter.
What is the difference between WikiProject Neurology and WikiProject Neuroscience? Or, to put it differently, should they be merged? 69.140.152.55 (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! You removed a question about euthanasia from the science reference desk, but a couple of us aren't sure it was really asking for medical advice. It was just asking for directory information, rather than suggested treatment. Do you still think it's unwise for us to answer it, or should I put it back? --Tango (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! Regarding your recent move of cetirizine, WikiProject Pharmacology guidelines state that drug articles should be named after the compound's INN—which rarely ever includes the salt, unlike the USAN, which always does. I've moved the article back to its original location; I hope that's OK with you. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please, no problem at all :) And since it seems you have a knack for medical editing, you're more than welcome to lend a hand over at WP:PHARM if you're interested. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm—I don't think so. Perhaps over at WT:MED? I've probably edited some articles on your Watchlist as well :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly regarding SAH - I don't plan to put that up for FAC until I know I will have the access to deal with all suggestions straight away. Presently, our computer is being fixed and I have to snatch time online here & there.
The nomenclature of mental illness is very contentious.[1] Obviously, a well recognised set of symptoms, whether mental or physical, can be termed a "disease". However, mental illnesses are generally labeled as "disorders" (major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, generalised anxiety disorder) for reasons that are not entirely clear to me. You are correct that diseases don't actually need a pathogen or even a pathological-anatomical substrate. JFW | T@lk 21:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! I'm so jealous that you managed to get those images out of Dr. Jallo--how'd you do it? Did you know him, or just email him out of the blue? I need a CT image for pulmonary contusion, so I want to figure out how to do the same thing. Did you just email authors of articles, or what? Also, I'd like to try to get it to FA status some day, but I'm not comfortable doing it until it's had a review by an expert. Any ideas on how I'd go about getting someone to give me one? I don't suppose you've heard back from Dr. Jallo about reviewing SAH? That seems like it'd be even more difficult to get than the image. Peace, delldottalk 20:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I am happy to inform that the article has been promoted to the GA status. By the way, I have renamed it as Polyclonal B cell response as I thought that sounded more appropriate.
Your encouragement, and constant focus on the article were very helpful. May be I might nominate it for "A-class" pretty soon.
Some nasty person removed my explaination: I'm not sure which year plastics were invented, but that I'm just concerned that xenoestrogens can alter hair growth. That's why I provided 2 years.68.148.164.166 (talk) 08:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be going overboard here. Medical questions (like "What are the symptoms of diabetes ?") are NOT requests for medical advice (like "What dosage of insulin would you recommend for me ?"). If asked such a question we should refer them to the appropriate Wikipedia article, not delete it. Your removal of the Asperger's Syndrome question and earlier removal of the euthanasia question both show an overzealous attempt to remove any question that relates to anything medical. Ask yourself this question when considering a removal: "Would anyone other than a doctor be charged with practicing medicine without a license if they answered ?". If so, then you can remove it. StuRat (talk) 21:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
it's in earnest: to show ohw ridiculous and offensive it is to keep "putting off" meeting someone (as though they were a zombie or something) rather than just doing the research in the beginning. It only takes a moment to find out whether it is transferred.
my comment (dont know if you removed it, but put it back please if you did) is a direct response to "i can't put off meeting them any longer". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.120.108.31 (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
