User talk:St3vo

This user is busy in real life due to postdoctoral studies and family, and may not respond swiftly to queries.

No problem - I figured it was something like that. -- Marj 18:41, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yeah I wasn't quite sure what to do about that. User:Nuklear had done a lot of work on various topics that I'm familiar with such as phenyltropane and fentanyl derivatives, but it got deleted from the main articles on the grounds that it was too complex for a general audience and much of it was plagarised. I was going to just rewrite the plagarised stuff to make it acceptable as he had included many good references and I felt the material added to wikipedia significantly, but since the consensus was that it was too complex for regular people to understand (which is stupid in my opinion since most people looking at these articles are likely to have an interest in neuropharmacology, structure-activity relationships etc) I felt that the best compromise was to leave the articles as short summaries and just link to the full articles which had been moved to his userspace. He got quite disheartened by having all his edits deleted and has now stopped editing so I guess its up to us to do something with. At the moment I've just been trying to go through and make pages for opioids and depressants that don't have pages at all yet, so it will be quite some time till I finish all those and get around to improving pages that already exist! But if you want to expand the ohmefentanyl page then go for it, I agree that its probably not appropriate for it to link to a page thats in userspace but if you look through the history of the pages on his userspace there's a lot of good material that would be entirely suitable once re-edited...Meodipt 10:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you need help with the Ara-dopamine and Ara-glyceryl ether let me know. I'm working (in real life) in this area.

-- Panoramix303 (talk) 14:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have time it would be great if you could check the GPR55 article. I'm not a native english speaker, so your corrections are appreciated. -- Panoramix303 (talk) 13:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This compound is also known as JWH-073 (Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 2000; 60:133–140).

I have written pages for some of the other more notable JWH compounds, as well as JWH-018, its 4-methoxy analogue JWH-081 is also worth a mention. There are of course heaps of other compounds from this family but many of them don't even have code numbers assigned, so are probably not notable enough to deserve their own pages yet. The pages are just stubs for now so could probably do with expanding further.Meodipt (talk) 06:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi St3vo. The compound SP-106, also known as Abbott 40656 was ultimately given the common name nabitan. If you can find out any more information about it then the page could certainly do with expanding, but there are so many other cannabinoid compounds of note that don't even have pages yet! I have expanded the cannabinoids template and put links to some of the compounds that seem to have been more widely used but will take a while to make pages for them all...Meodipt (talk) 12:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi St3vo. Your structure for taranabant is incorrect, the nitrile group is the wrong way round (should be -C≡N not -N⁺≡C^-). I'm not sure how to replace the image as it is from wikimedia commons and doesn't give me an option to upload a new version, but it would be good if you could upload a correct version. Nice find by the way, I hadn't come across that compound myself! Meodipt (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah the CB1 inverse agonists seem to have too harsh a side effect profile to be much good as anorectics judging by the post-marketing results from rimonabant, although perhaps they might show more promise as anti-addictive drugs. I suspect weak partial agonists at CB1 will be an area we will see much more growth in though, especially for applications like treating neuropathic pain that neither traditional opoids or NSAIDs deal with effectively. Lots of potential in this area for sure! Meodipt (talk) 09:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've raised the possibility of unprotecting the tamazepam page here. What are your thoughts? Tim Vickers (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've unprotected it, please edit slowly. I'd recommend redrafting sections one at a time on the talkpage, like we're doing with the tolerance one at the moment. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer? Not that I know of, and I don't have the skillz to create one either :) You can always ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiblame will find when a particular word or phrase was added to an article. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did some cleanup towards improved Pharmacology chapter. Could you please take a look? There are still open points in Pharmacology, see annotated proposal on talk page. Could you comment? Also I have left several discussion points on the talk page. Could you comment them too? I am concerned that the original editors do not participate in the discussion. 70.137.161.241 (talk) 00:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article has progressed. Please take a look and comment. 70.137.181.232 (talk) 22:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there I noticed you mentioned interest in this, I was thinking about writing some stuff on it myself once my exams are over. The main compound investigated by Edgewood Arsenal for this purpose was DMHP, the reason it has several different EA- code numbers is because the three asymmetric carbons gives DMHP eight possible stereoisomers, which apparently vary quite substantially in potency. So most of the work they did used either THC itself, or various isomers of DMHP, and I was planning to expand the DMHP page to reflect this. The main military interest was apparently because DMHP produces pronounced hypotension as well as the expected sedation, but with fairly low toxicity. Theres a lot of information here if you are interested. Meodipt (talk) 06:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got around to expanding this a bit...Meodipt (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi St3vo. With the phenanthrene opioids it would be most accurate to say that the free 3-OH group significantly boosts μ-opioid binding and activity, but is not absolutely required for it. You are correct that in general, compounds with a free OH are much more potent, and when the OH is masked (as in codeine) then the activity is substantially reduced, in the case of codeine to such an extent that it is almost entirely inactive and relies upon its demethylation to morphine for its analgesic effect (although note that codeine does have some direct actions such as on peripheral histamine release).

However when the molecule has other characteristics which give it high μ-opioid binding affinity, then this may be sufficient to give it intrinsic activity even with the 3-OH group masked or removed. With oxycodone for instance the 14-OH group and 6-ketone boost activity sufficiently that oxycodone is active in its own right, and indeed only a very small percentage is converted to oxymorphone and this is not thought to be a major component of its action. With hydrocodone on the other hand its a bit more controversial, it does have some intrinsic activity but not enough to really explain its analgesic potency, and so the evidence suggests that demethylation to hydromorphone probably is important for its action to some extent. There are even examples of active compounds where the 3-OH is entirely absent; N-Methylmorphinan for instance (which can be regarded as 3-desoxy-levorphanol) is almost as potent an opioid agonist as morphine despite having no 3-OH group at all.

Also its important to note that binding affinity is not the whole story, you also have to consider pharmacokinetics. With oxycodone and hydrocodone for instance, they may be significantly less potent than their O-demethylated counterparts, but their oral bioavailability is far higher - from memory I believe the oral bioavailability of oxycodone is around 80-90% whereas oxymorphone it is only 20% - so this means that while oxymorphone and hydromorphone are much more powerful pain relievers when given IV in a hospital setting for instance, the less potent oxycodone and hydrocodone are more versatile drugs due to the strong preference for convenient oral dosage forms in outpatient treatment.

For some good reading material in this area I recommend the reviews by Paul Janssen and Daniel Lednicer who have both written textbooks summarising the history of opioid SAR research in some detail. Meodipt (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any input, especially with regards to pharmacology, feel free to add to the discussion on my talk page. DMacks (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For my answer and asking for comments, see DMacks user page. Greetings from Anon 70.137. Besides I think that the concept of "substantial similarity" of the analog act is unscientific. See my comments on propylhexedrine in this light too. 70.137.173.82 (talk) 08:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After 2 reverts the user w. the generic pills picture warned me next edit is 3rr and reported me as IPVandal at the same time. I got blocked for 3 days. I rebooted and complained, then it was CIVILITY, reduced to 31 hours, plus additional block for block evasion. I have now complained again. Admin is Aitias. Somebody has to look into that. Probably I get blocked now for evading the block evasion block. Sorry, I am doing really tedious edits, incl database searches, proofreading against sources and citecheck. Without my work the article would look like crap. And I am still continuously reverted by wild running vandal hunters, based on a hunch, because I am anon. When I got reverted the n-th time as vandalism in a perfectly fine edit from proofreading I reverted back, saying reinstating perfectly fine edits from proofreading @$$hole. Now that INCIVIL I admit. But I don't have the nerve for that kindergarten. 70.137.146.36 (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do thank you for all your hard work on the article, and I agree that you are unfairly targeted for being anon, which is your right. This discrimination is a product of so many editors fighting real IP vandals all day, and I doubt it'll go away any time soon. You have to agree, though, that sometimes your confrontational responses (the "asshole" bit, for instance) have played a role too; established editors here take the civility thing very seriously and in the future a lot of this could be solved by simply sticking to the facts (eg. such and such a statement was alarmist and was unsupported by the literature cited, etc.) Please understand I agree with your edits, it's just all in how you represent them, especially knowing that you'll likely be discriminated against for not being registered. Try not to give them a reason to do so. I'll see you on the other side of the block. St3vo (talk) 00:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for the good words, buddy. We really improved that article a lot, and I know you have been skeptical about my work first. But you see it ended up as a rational article, cleared of sensationalism and related undue weight for the fringe aspects, cleared of warped claims based on misrepresentations. The truth is in real life I am as dry as a bone and as sober and boring as a retired engineer/mathematician can be. I am doing this editing to learn and discuss topics outside my professional field. That is good for mental training and plasticity. That is also how I developed from a laboratory helper electrician. There are marked cultural differences between old Europeans and young Americans. In particular the young Americans are in a sense sincere and one-dimensional and take every frivolity at face value. They also are vulnerable and make a fuss out of every thing. If I tell an old British guy he has to take care not to be too anal with his adminazi behavior, or he will be the Freisler of Wikiland, or more precisely he will turn Wikiland into Freislerland and his vandal hunters will probably be Blockwarts of Wikiland, then the British guy thinks I have a good humor and I am a jolly good fellow. And if I greet him with Wieki-Heil after that he laughs his ass off. Look at the Fawlty Towers. In case of your adminazi cry-babies they bring a whole department of admins together for a half day to hunt me down and reverse my badwords etc etc. They are just too anal and it absolutely makes no sense. (are the guys programmed in Prolog?) With that mindset I could drive them into a denial of service attack, when working from a distributed network. That is what I meant with kindergarten. It is only now, after a dozen years as immigrant, that I realize how foreign the culture is to me, and how foreign I am in this country. But it is probably also a generation problem. I know talk pages are for the Wikipedia, but I think they are also to connect between cultures. 70.137.184.193 (talk) 09:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be precise, I think for quite some time that they must be either disformed by a narrow education, or they are autists, or they are avatars of an artificial intelligence program. Because they not only take things at face value, missing methaphoric meaning, but they sometimes miss the whole semantic of what I am saying and jump on trigger-words. For some time I have taken this as an outgrowth of political correctness, but if it is really only this, then something is really wrong with them. They really behave like talking heads. Is the American system like that today? The Americans of 1970 were different. 70.137.184.193 (talk) 10:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In particular the disparity between scientific knowledge base and semantic processing is what reminds me most of autists or AI avatars. 70.137.184.193 (talk) 10:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the observed peculiarities imo neither fit Kanner type nor Asperger type, maybe remotely some hyperlexia. Recently I am tending away from autistic formenkreis toward AI. Another peculiarity I noticed is that some admins seem to factor conjunctions in a right associative way, as if parsing bottom up on longest match. They understand language and derived semantics in a similar way as a Floyd production parser would, with semantic action on reduction from RIGHT to LEFT! And they have misdecode recognizing subjunctive forms, in particular implied subjunctive forms. This sounds remotely as if dealing with tlkrs 'f Hbrw 'r 'thr smtc lngs, or mr lkly lk avtmtc prsrs prbl wrtn b' 'srl prgrmrs. Ww! 't xplns lt. 70.137.147.62 (talk) 07:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the anonymous IP is referring to me, per this comment left on my talk page (either that or the anonymous IP has an obsession with this stuff - which is, I grant, entirely possible). I have a few points to make regarding this:

• I reverted the anonymous IP's edit to Carfentanil because they removed information they deemed incorrect without making any effort to correct it.
• I am not an admin, as has been explained to the anonymous IP here.
• I have no comment to make regarding my linguistic skills or whether or not I'm using automated parsers to decipher Wikipedia posts.
• This IP has been at this nonsense for some time now.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 09:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St3vo, as you said, we are all supposed to be friends here, as we are working towards a common goal. Only the last conversations with DougieWII didn't sound like that and were no real discussion. he also turned me in for "IP vandalism", "page Blanking", "block evasion" and a false claim of "3rr" and "edit warring". This didn't sound like the academic dispute I would have expected, indeed it did sound like somebody kicking under the belt and having no manners and education at all. I cannot see how I can contribute in this environment, as I had expected WP to be a largely academic community. So I say good bye for the moment and wish you all the best for graduate school. 70.137.151.167 (talk) 10:13, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you the best as well, and sincerely hope you see fit to return at some point in the future. St3vo (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:07, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 18:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Saw this, good work man :-) Meodipt (talk) 09:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Now I just have to figure out what exactly it's working through...St3vo (talk) 14:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Methanandamide.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, St3vo. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, St3vo. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, St3vo. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]