User talk:KBlott

Welcome!

Hello, KBlott, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Ryan shell (talk) 22:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Neuroleptic Deletions

Thanks for your excellent suggestions at User_talk:MeekMark#Neuroleptic_Deletions! I've responded to Postcrypto's question on what to do next on the talk page for Postcrypto. — MeekMark (talk) 12:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Virus talk pages

If you add the {{WikiProject Viruses|class=Stub|importance=}} banner to the talk pages of virus articles you create you may get help with editing the articles from interested editors who monitor virus articles. Thanks for your article creations on primate viruses. --KP Botany (talk) 03:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Citations

Thanks again for your contributions to the organic anion transporter 1 article. Per our discussion, I have merged in the material from SLC22A6 into the organic anion transporter 1 article.

If you haven't seen this yet, please check out User:Diberri's Wikipedia template filling tool (instructions). Given a PubMed ID, one can quickly produce a full citation that can be copied and pasted into a Wikipedia article. This tool will save you some work and help insure that the citations are displayed in a consistent manner. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 05:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I recently installed a reference formatting widget but it doesn't seem to work. Perhaps I've simply been using it incorrectly. I've been filling out citations manually, which is very time consuming. I'll take a look at the PubMed template filling tool.

The merged OAT1 article looks good to me. The evidence relating to the hypothesis that nucleoside analog induced Fanconi syndrome is due to OAT1-positive cell cytotoxicity remains incomplete. Why, for example, is this condition characterized by glycosuria, hypophosphatemia, proteinuria, acidosis, and hypokalemia? Are S2 cells involved in the re-uptake of these substrates? I would like to address this question before I go on to do other things. KBlott (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Depending on what browser you are using, some of these Wikipedia widgets can be somewhat finicky. You might try using a different browser. Alternatively the template filling tool that I mentioned above is very simple to use. The hardest thing about using it is tracking down a PMID. Once you have that, it is very quick and easy to create a citation template.

Thanks for expanding the article further. Transporters are somewhat out of my area of expertise so I am sorry I can't provide much further help on this particular article. But it looks like the article is now in very good hands :-) Keep up the good work! Boghog (talk) 17:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm afraid my interest in OAT1 is likely to be short lived, depending on other demands for my time. There is certainly an abundance of OAT1 literature which I have yet to read. The link to the template filler that you provided was very helpful.

I am currently running under Internet Explorer. Firefox is not installed on my current system. Although Firefox has better functionality than IE, in practice, all that overhead slows down run time. My productivity tends to decline sharply when response time is slow. KBlott (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit protection

I would like to write an article titled "When should antiretroviral therapy be initiated?" This issue is very controversial. May I request edit protection from user:hamiltonstone?

No. Edit protection is not used pre-emptively; content disputes should be worked out on the talk page and if necessary by use of WP:Dispute resolution. Remember that what you write must follow the principles of WP:Neutral point of view and WP:Verifiability from reliable published sources. Also, your proposed article sounds like a content fork of the existing Antiretroviral therapy; please read WP:Content forking for guidance on whether that would be appropriate. JohnCD (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

The Antiretroviral drug page claims that Antiretroviral drug treatment guidelines have changed many times. Early recommendations attempted a "hit hard, hit early" approach. This isn't true. [1] Making second attempt to correct antiretroviral page. KBlott (talk) 01:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but is there a specific question here? Shearonink (talk) 03:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes. There are two users who are just making stuff up. This is the most recent example. Obviously antiretroviral therapy didn’t just fall out of the sky fully developed. Drug therapy was developed over time and the 1995 article by David Ho which the user cites certainly does not claim that it was not. “Hit early, hit hard” was not seriously debated until 1995. Before that, drug therapy was offered only to patients with advanced disease. [2] This particular user is not the worst one. He is willing to discuss his views. The other one isn’t. I am happy to continue to add properly sourced evidence from reliable sources. Doing so, however, will almost certainly provoke one of these two users (probably hamiltonstone) to delete the citation. I have noooooooo idea how to prevent this outcome. Can you provide any useful guidance on how to avoid this? KBlott (talk) 06:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Propose changes to the article on the articles talk page, Talk:Antiretroviral drug. Consider suggesting one small change, at first, and listen to the opinions of others; try to reach an agreed WP:CONSENSUS.

If you are unable to agree, seek a third opinion, or if necessary, some kind of mediation; there are many options to resolve disagreements - see WP:DISCUSS.

If, during calm discussions, another editor refuses to be civil or breaks other policies (such as adding unreferenced material), they can be appropriately warned and ultimately blocked from editing; this is an entirely separate issue to any content dispute. In the content discussion, make sure you stick to discussion of the subject, and not other editors.

Above all, stay calm. Remember there is no deadline.  Chzz  ►  07:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The Definition of Denial

{{helpme}}

Regarding this edit, how should I respond? (This users behaviour resembles that of hamiltonstone.) About one in three AIDS carriers suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder. [3] Denial is a symptom of PTSD.

Please note the discussuion 'Misunderstanding of "denial" in this context?' in 'user talk:HIV'.

Additional discussion on talk pages WILL NOT lead to consensus as the edit is patently unreasonable. The next logical step is to post the evidence that PTSD is common among people with HIV/AIDS along with the evidence that denial is a symptom of the disorder. However, such a post WILL be deleted. How should I proceed? KBlott (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

All pages are built on consensus, using if necessary the article talk page or in some cases (especially where that page is poorly frequented by other editors) the project's talk page.. If there is no consensus to add, then it should not go in. If it ends up with just 2 editors disagreeing, then one can use some of the options provided at dispute resolution.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 23:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

The person reverting you was correct. Your edit didn't add anything to the article. "AIDs Denial" is more specific than simply "Denial". "AIDs Denial" makes the article read better. Hope that helped. Mr. R00t ^Talk 23:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)