User talk:Zuiram

Please click here to leave me a new message. Remember to sign your posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Zuiram, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Arcadian 14:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tranylcypromine

Hi Zuiram,

I noticed your work on Tranylcypromine - I've posted a question on the talk page, and would also be interested to see what other information you were thinking of contributing. I'm not educated in this area, but have an interest. --Singkong2005 · talk 06:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to the article, and notified you on this talk page. Zuiram 09:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per Morten Hoff

Hei, jeg har oppdatert siden om Per Morten Hoff, og forsøkt å trekke frem engasjementet som har faktisk er kjent for i Norge. Jeg er usikker på om alt er relevant for engelske wikipedia, men om du ønsker å oversette, er du velkommen til det:) Legg igjen en beskjed på talk-siden min om du vil. Segrov 21:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I got your message. The article should be alright as it is, i guess. So just go ahead :) Segrov 23:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do. I've got a lot on my plate right now, so it might not be straight away. Bad excuse, I know. Zuiram 03:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having examined the revised version of the page, it would appear that there are no sources that can be considered to satisfy WP:V, and that WP:NOTE has not been demonstrated. I'll see if I can dig up any, and have left a notice on the Norwegian article's talk page, requesting that they come up with something. Translating in its current state makes little sense, and I'm not really convinced that he fits the criterion for notability in the first place. I'll do a best effort to find a decent source, though. Zuiram 02:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Antidepressant template refactoring

Yeah, I'd been meaning to change that template, as it is a bit messy and doesn't contain all that it should. It's true, there isn't much interest in drug templates. I myself haven't been editing consistently for months. I'm unsure whether having one template with all antidepressants split into different sections would be a good idea or not. It might be way too large. It might be necessary to create different templates for each type (e.g. MAOI, SSRI, etc.) of antidepressant. We should perhaps check the wikiproject:drugs page before making any changes, as I started some dialogue about it several months ago, but haven't had the time to check up on it. There is also the issue of how to classify all the antidepressants. It would probably be best to use some standard system, such as the ATC codes which are almost always used. (although I don't agree with the ATC using the section "other" which contains a broad group of drugs, including bupropion, which should actually be considered a stimulant, as it is a phenethylamine similar to cathinone). Also, feel free to edit any of my project pages. I use them as a sort of staging ground for information that I'm collecting, or new items that I'm working on. Fuzzform 05:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

?

What did you mean when you said, Let's be optimists and assume 100 pics per kid, and 100KiB per image, and the math turns up circa 800 kids raped-to-order. Lolicon does not rank. now im confused! what did you say & was that an agreeing with me statement or a Anti-lolicon statement--Lolicon3043910 18:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was agreeing with you that lolicon is not a problem, as far as I'm concerned. And that, even to the people who do think lolicon is a problem, that "problem" still does not deserve their attention, when compared to such a thing as sites that can "boast" at least 800 kids raped.

I'm arguing that I do not personally take offense at lolicon, as there is nothing (IMHO) ethically wrong with drawings of any sort (although there are contexts in which they do not belong, and uses to which they should not be put).

I'm also arguing that people should spend their effort where it will do the most good and that, hence, even the people who do take offense at it, should focus their effort on real children, not lines on paper or the computer screen that our brain interprets as a representation of imaginary children.

Feel free to cite this as a vote in that direction if there is some kind of consensus debate or, better yet, ask me to chime in.

This is not a topic I actively try to contribute to, so I don't watch those pages unless I'm looking something up, but I do try to be a "voice/vote of reason" (as I see it) whenever I come across a debate that is going in a direction I consider to be NPOV. Zuiram 02:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rhodiola Rosea

Do you have a link to the Norwegian article you mentioned on the Rhodiola Rosea talk page? I would like to verify the source. Tolsen718 04:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resources

I noticed that the Resources section on your userpage is copied from my userpage (or perhaps I copied yours?). If you're interested, I have an updated version here, which includes more sources/databases. Cheers, Fuzzform (talk) 05:26, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]