User:JWSchmidt/Talk from 2005

This (below) is an archive of old talk for User:JWSchmidt. Please do not edit this page. Continue any old discussions at User talk:JWSchmidt --JWSchmidt 00:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Image recreation requests

Greetings. I just started the Wikipedia:Image recreation requests project, and I thought you might be interested. Your help would be greatly appreciated. (I got your name from the list at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Graphic Artists.) Best regards, – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 03:12, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Copyright clearing

Hi. I would like to use Image:Drosophila egg.png under the CC-By-SA-2 licence. I will use it on my site. Thanks, answer to my talk page. It's a great pic. NSK 02:05, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Enjoy. It is a scanning laser confocal image. The green color is from the dye YoPro. The yellow seems to have been mostly autofluorescence. There are some other Drosophila images that I uploaded [1], and if you are looking for something in particular I have others that I have not uploaded to wikipedia. JWSchmidt 01:52, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject participation

Hey, kudos to you with the Cellular and molecular biology wikiproject, i don't know if you started it, but if you did, kudos. I would love to help out as much as i can in this project; I understand I could just work on any old articles at my leisure, but I'd love to help to the maximum efficiency, so I'm just telling you that I am here for the sake of helping out other wikipedians and organization in regards to the wikiproject. I am currently a Cellbiotech student at U of Alberta, and worked in a protein X-Ray crystallography lab this summer, so in regards to that i can help and tend to. Adenosine | Talk 03:56, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Rubisco

Hi, thanks for adding a protien box to the rubisco article. Could you please clarify exactly what part of Rubisco is in the image and if its from a plant or bacteria, it looks kind of like a single large subunit- including the name of the PDB entry on the image page would probably be a good idea. There is a crystal structure for the assumed biological unit from plants at 1RCX and you can also generate a image through here, which would make a great addition to the article, but I can't get the file open - so I was hoping you'd have a go. I plant on adding to the text in the next few days.--nixie 06:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Humbled

JWS, I'm humbled by your stunning work on RuBisCo. Could you indicate whether I could be of any help anywhere? My main interest is human molecular and cellular biology, but I'd love to help out.

PS do you use MDL ISIS? I've just installed it to draw molecules for the pharmacology pages, but I'm having trouble exporting my images to JPEG and PNG. Also, is it possible to change the default background in RasMol to white (or transparent)? JFW | T@lk 11:53, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

White background with RasMol

Everyone is welcome. I am particularly concerned that the start of the RuBisCo article explain in ordinary language the fundamental importance of RuBisCo for life on Earth. The Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject article contains some ideas for how to improve articles such as RuBisCo. In particular, there is the possibility of extending the RuBisCo protein information box using the optional protein information box templates.

The RasMol background for images can be set. You can apparently also do transparent GIFs, but I have never tried that. I have never used MDL ISIS. --JWSchmidt 14:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

---

Why 10 dimensions?

I've read on the talk page, that you considered moving the article to WikiBooks. I'd agree that it would fit much better there. Are there any problems with moving? --Pjacobi 08:08, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

I put a copy here to protect it from wikipedia deletionists. There might be a physics book at wikibooks that would take it, but I do not care to try to find out. --JWSchmidt 08:23, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls

Hi John,

Thanks for joining the project. Can you verify that the subcategories in the biology list are suitable? I would like to make sure that no important sub field was left out and that there are no unrelated entries. Thanks, APH 05:57, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

The list of biology publications that is linked to from the project page is a reasonable start. There are some defects in the categorization of biology fields; for example, having a category of Psychopharmacology but not the more general Pharmacology, but I do not see any categories need to be removed. --JWSchmidt 13:20, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Semiconservative replication

Hi I just recently added a diagram I made to Semiconservative replication. I was hoping to hear you feedback on it, I really appreciated you input on the calvin cycle pathway diagram, I don't know what your intreset is in biochemistry, but i was hoping you'd have insight again. I made this pict originally for the meselson-stahl page and the DNA replication page, but those require some text upgrades before they can accept this diagram, thought this page would be a good proving ground. Thanks Adenosine | Talk 08:11, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology

Thanks for the link on the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology, i didn't knew about it. See you around. Lilious 15:23, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk pages

Please don't delete other peoples posts from talk pages.Alun 18:56, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

If I did so, it was accidental. --JWSchmidt 19:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Strange deletion of a second paragraph down the page from the one I inserted. --JWSchmidt 21:04, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Center for Disease Control

Rather than listing for deletion, I made it a redirect to the appropriate article.--Gaff ^talk 06:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I should have thought of that. I'm going to bed. --JWSchmidt 06:39, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Emergency department

I wonder if you would consider supporting Emergency department at Wikipedia:Article improvement drive, to raise the profile of medicine on the wikipedia. The ED is a key area where the public receive emergency care, but the current article is very inadequate.--File Éireann 23:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not a medical doctor. --JWSchmidt 00:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Immanuel Velikovsky

I saw your request for help for Carl Sagan at Immanuel Velikovsky. I read Sagan's stuff many years ago and I have reviewed some of it over the last couple of days. Is there anything specific you need help with now? Bubba73 (talk), 04:56, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

reply on your page --JWSchmidt 13:35, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello. Hey guess what my last name is Schmidt too. pretty amazing. My husband and I just bought the DVD series about Carl Segan. We were both thrilled beyond words when we watched it...I watched Mr. Segan when it was first on PBS...I was so impressed with his presentations about space and other cool science things and history...He was a very kind and loving human being and smart too! He is greatly missed by me. He was in the wonderful rhelm of the Old Star Trekkers. Scotty he too is greatly missed. And Doc McCoy. And Spocks father Serek. Well I just wanted to give you a shout out...

Melissa Schmidt Camano Island,WA

RFA

Thanks for accepting, John. You'll be the least controversial admin nomination I've made for a long time :-). Don't forget to sign Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JWSchmidt and to link it from the WP:RFA page! I'm honoured to nominate you. JFW | T@lk 15:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Navigation box "Discovery of the DNA Double Helix"

Thank you for warning me about some editors not liking the Discovery of the DNA Double Helix navigation box. I inserted it on the Rosalind Franklin page because it was the only one of the six pages linked to in the box that didn't feature the box itself. (On the Linus Pauling page, the box is not at the top of the page because he is chiefly known for other things, but it is still there, in the section on DNA.) Sorry to say, I don't have the graphic skill to make the box look nicer and maybe avoid it getting deleted. (By the way, I suspect some editors dislike this box not so much because of functionality or graphic-design concerns as because they disagree about who deserves mention and who doesn't in connection with the discovery of the double-helix structure.) Thanks again. --Bwiki 18:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Semi-protection proposal

After reading your comments at Talk:Wolf Blitzer I thought you might be interested in the discussion currently taking place at Wikipedia talk:Semi-protection policy. Hall Monitor 23:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I saw the Semi-protection policy proposal yesterday. I'm in favor of putting all newly created articles into a special "new article" name space. New articles should not reach Wikipedia until they have been reviewed. I think "Semi-protection" would be useful, but I would be willing to see even wider use of such protection: it could be the default for all pages and a page would only leave the default rules of "Semi-protection" if there was a list of editors watching the page and protecting it from vandals. --JWSchmidt 23:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales on CNN

Did you not watch the video? My recollection is that the libelee clearly stated that Wikipedia was libeling him for 5 months.--AustinKnight 02:37, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I have corrected the phrasing to specifically point out that the existing processes (not mentioned, but allusions to admin "oversight" (no pun intended)) within Wikipedia did not correct the libel until it was brought to Wales' attention, but that even after the libelee was assured of fixes that Wikipedia history files still contained the libel. --AustinKnight 02:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Stable versions

It's taken me a while, but I finally understand the photo at Wikipedia talk:Stable versions. Of course, there should be an official Wikipedia policy barring humour like that... ;-) — Matt Crypto 10:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

All I really wanted to do was fill in some white space. My "humor" usually goes under the radar. --JWSchmidt 14:19, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

DNA navigation box

I have added JMcC's suggestions to your navigation box, I hope you don't mind. I have been won over to the navigation box idea after finding out how easy it is to edit it. I have also ordered people alphabetically as it should (hopefully) prevent too much dispute. Alun 13:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the box is starting to look much better now there are a few more names there. The idea of the base pairing is becoming more apparent. A few more names and I think it might look really good. Maybe we can keep it for a while and see what the general opinon is. I added the box the William Astbury's page, but there was no picture of him, so I added a diagram of DNA I found in the commons. I'll start adding the box to the other new additions as well. Alun 15:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Nice work on the info boxes, I like the new ones as well. Alun 18:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I have been trying to address the concerns of JMcC while also including the names of other people involved in DNA research. What I have been trying to do is to include a main navigation box (my version of your double stranded box, but yours would be just as good) that includes only the four important contributors to the structure in 1953. I have also included the single stranded box with the names of the other people (excluding the four biggies, why put them in two boxes?). The original single stranded navigation box, with all contributors on it can be used for articles about people other than the big four of 1953. I hope that doing this I can forge a compromise between your position and that of JMcC, who only wants the four main contributors on the box. I realise that by doing ths I may in fact just antagonise both of you. This is not my intention, I am merely trying to forge consensus. Alun 06:08, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Administrator

Congratulations, you are now an administrator! If you haven't already, now is the time to read the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, I'm happy to help, or you can ask them at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Best wishes, Warofdreams talk 12:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Glad you enjoy the rollback button. It saves time. But it is tempting to use it where the revert ideally should be explained.

I saw you'd identified Anthrax vaccine. As you correctly surmised, it may become a vehicle of User:Ombudsman's familiar agenda if not watched with some care. JFW | T@lk 08:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

H5N1

1. I'm not going to revert your removal of "a commercial link" with regard to "panzootic (a disease affecting animals of many species esp. over a wide area [2])".
2. I put it there because I was providing my source for the definition of panzootic. I had never seen the word before. I've seen it a lot since.
3. I agree with pruning too long external links, but removing sources is not pruning and the New York Times is "a commercial link" and we don't go around willy nilly deleting them.
4. So thanks for the good pruning; but please watch it with deleting sources.
5. Just cause you add a good research link doesn't mean you have to delete ANOTHER good research link.
6. Lastly, thanks for helping, the article could use some spiffing up. WAS 4.250 21:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

From you: (1)"I am going to be continuing to move all external links from the main text and replacing them with citations to the references list according to Wikipedia:footnotes. I will be reviewing all commercial links."(2)"A commercial link that sends me to an advertisement page will be removed without much comment" My reply: (1)Wow, wonderful, I'm so GD lazy or I'd have done it myself! Thank you. (2)Sources are key and I'll work with you on dealing with finding the right ones. Thanks again for helping out. WAS 4.250 03:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

In response to your discussion post...

Well I am taking Bio II in the spring semester. It will be covering genetics, and cell biology. How about some articles on Genetics? - JedOs 18:35, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

"life"

Shucks -- I thought my edit was accurate! You have no sense of humor. ;) Danflave 21:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Check the history, I described your edit: "revert 'joke' edit" --JWSchmidt 21:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Not a commercial website

I don't know whether this is the "talk" place you where writing about, but just to say the website I added to the Asbestos Wiki was completely non-commercial, it makes no money at all, its only purpose is information and advice. Sorry again if this is the wrong place, but I didn't know what the talk space was.

I am guessing that you are talking about this edit. When I went to the URL you added I found advertisements. It is a common problem at the asbestos article for commercial links to be added. I suggest that you discuss questionable websites on the Talk:Asbestos page before inserting them into the main article. --JWSchmidt 22:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

New user guidance

Hi - A new user, User talk:Reveldrummond, has recently added the article Magnesium in biological systems. I gave him/her a welcome and have been helping with it a bit. I would appreciate it if you would take a look and add your biology expertice. The article has a large ref section and the user plans to expand it. Please take a looksee and give some advice/guidance. Thanks, Vsmith 02:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi - Thanks for looking in on the page. I am considering adding quite a bit more stuff over the next month(?) depends how long it takes how much in put on. I have a lot of text that could go on to the page, may need a lot of editing to fit the forum, some of it is perhaps a bit over the top for an encylopedia entry. What do you think of the detail too far? I have a very long section covering the transport of magnesium. To give you an idea it is divided in to sections based on the type of organism bacteria, yeast, plants, animals. Quite a lot of molecular biology. -Reveldrummond 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Peter Griffin block

Why did you block Peter Griffin for only 24 hours even though he was already blocked infinitely by someone else (see the first few lines of the block log)?? Georgia guy 00:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that. This was only the second user with a user name that I have blocked. I did two things to check if Peter Griffin had been blocked. First, when I looked at the user talk page there was indication that the user had been blocked. I then tried to use {{Template:vandal}} to check if this user had been blocked. I have now learned that {{vandal|Peter Griffin}} does not work and that I should have used {{vandal|Peter_Griffin}}. --JWSchmidt 01:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Medical controversies

To tell you the truth, the page is probably more of a bad idea than a good idea. It would end up having few if any contributors from the medical group and would probably have ended up as more of "medical criticisms" than medical controversies. I think it could be a nice list with a lot of work, but it would be just one NPOV slog after another and there are more important, very basic medical topics screaming for attention right now other than the minutiae it was likely to attract. Hopefully as Wikipedia matures and attracts a more representative group of people it will be done well! InvictaHOG 02:35, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

H5N1

Please see the H5N1 talk page. Thanks. WAS 4.250 17:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

Hi! Please be careful when reverting. You reintroduced a number of errors by reverting to an older edit. Thanks! Jokestress 18:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know that my edit caused a reversion. My intention was to edit the current version of the article and I do not remember seeing a warning about editing an old version. --JWSchmidt 18:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Greetings

Thanks for raising the points you did on wikibooks:Talk:Wikiversity:Learning - I won't be so active over the next while (certainly not the next few days) but I'll try to come back to it when I have a bit more time. In the meantime, have a happy and peaceful Christmas / Holiday season.. Cormaggio ^@ 14:34, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Francis Crick talk page

With regards to the anonymous post on the Francic Crick talk page. I would just like to say that, though we may have very different opinions on certain subjects, I have always found you and your arguments reasonable and balanced (unlike Martin Packer who I feel is unreasonable and possibly unbalanced!!! (joke!!)). I consider you an asset to wikipedia and have learned a lot from the discussions I have had with you. Merry Christmas. Alun 19:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Bovasial contex driven neural response

It's been a while...was there an AfD I participated on? --HappyCamper 02:26, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah yes, I remember now. This was way back when I was a green admin. I'm no expert on biology. Is the article a complete hoax? --HappyCamper 02:33, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Alright, I will AfD the article. I'll get back to you once I'm done... --HappyCamper 02:40, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, check out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bovasial contex driven neural response --HappyCamper 02:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Just wondering...how did you come across that article? It was rather fortuitous that you did! --HappyCamper 03:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Why did you remove the hoax and deletion tags from Bovasial contex driven neural response without any comment? --JWSchmidt 02:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Because I thought the article had been vandalized, since it was made by an IP. When I find a suspicious edit by an IP on RC patrol, I usually revert it, preferring to err on precaution. Sorry if I reverted a legitimate edit. JoaoRicardo^talk 04:21, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. I was just checking in order to learn what you thought about the article. --JWSchmidt 04:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks JWSchmidt

Thanks for helping me with the footnote on the Francis Crick talk page! Merry Christmas and a happy new year! -207.200.116.11

It was my pleasure. I learned that a second citation to an existing reference can be placed anywhere. Now that can be really dangerous. --JWSchmidt 00:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Jean Baudrillard

Hi, Polythought looks like a better redirect doesn't it. I didn't know that article existed! Dlyons493 Talk 10:46, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Unless Polythought is a copyright violation. --JWSchmidt 14:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Both look like they've come from [3] - that either didn't exist or I missed it when looking Monothought originally. That makes them both OR as well. Dlyons493 Talk 14:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, original research and hence uncyclopedaic.

The alert you gave me on the people trying to cause deletions

I'll look at it tonight. Sorry for the delay, but I'm somehow getting entangled in these disputes again. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 01:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. I should not have bothered you, but I was favorably impressed with your comment here. --JWSchmidt 04:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

No no. it's ok. I'm here to help. First thing I would do is to ask for a check user to see whether or not Disposable Account and Paulcardan are the same person. I would recommend leaving a note on Jayjg's page. He is one of the 5 people with checkuser rights and he's good about doing those types of things ASAP. If they are the same person, then you should be able to get one of them blocked as a sockpuppet of the other since sockpuppets are big league no nos for afd votes. In fact, I'll ask Jayjg myself if he can do a checkuser. I'll let you know what the results are. Once I get the results, I'll let you know what else I think you should do, ok? --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 06:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)