Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2600:1700:b8b8:40:7865:6a2:1c05:5731 (talk) at 21:03, 18 December 2022 (Retrotope article: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconPharmacology Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used


No simufilam article

This drug, while relatively new and not yet approved, has been in the news for a while. Odd that nobody has taken on an article. Whether it works or not is immaterial. It appears to qualify as a subject of interest to Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created a bare bones article at Simufilam, but I haven't got access to the right sources for fleshing it out. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some eyes on the article would be welcome because of repeated IP edits that look very POVy to me. However, I don't have access to the relevant journals, and also quite frankly not the time to handle this. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 19:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very COI/POVy editors at the related Cassava Sciences. More eyes needed, semi-protection expires tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have attempted some cleanup at Simufilam, which is clearly as plagued by COI/POV editing as was Cassava Sciences. More eyes are needed at both; I have barely scratched the surface of either article; both have been hit by non-neutral IP editing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I could really use some help at both simufilam and Cassava Sciences. There have been two different types of COI editing: 1) puffery to promote the company, and b) smears to tarnish it (per the short-selling issue). Cassava Sciences had been semi-protected twice, and the IPs are finally registering accounts and weighing in on talk (which makes for a lot of work, educating new editors). There is much cleanup needed still. I don't know how drug articles are typically organized, but the company proponents want to include a lot of press releases and primary sources. I also don't know how clinical trials should be organized in drug articles, so wish some Pharm editors would take on the drug article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Save Award for Enzyme inhibitor

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Enzyme inhibitor/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cassava and simufilam

Hi! Sharing in case this is of interest to anyone here: a draft article about Precision BioSciences, a publicly traded clinical stage gene editing company, is currently under review in the AfC queue. I have a COI here – Precision BioSciences is a client of mine. Happy to answer any questions, and appreciate any time/feedback. Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm involved in a dispute on whether Ivermectin should be listed as a 3-chymotrypsin-like protease inhibitor on the page Protease inhibitor (pharmacology). It would be terrific if additional editors could weigh in to help resolve the dispute, and the community here seems like a really good resource. I've added some discussion to Talk:Protease inhibitor (pharmacology), as well. Thanks so much! Asacarny (talk) 04:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of pharmacological data tables

There seems to be a wide lack of receptor affinity or binding tables on some classes of drug. Psychiatric drugs developed in recent decades generally have them (like the table here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quetiapine#Pharmacology ). But drugs of natural derivation, drugs that predate modern pharmacology, and drugs that have little or no approved psychiatric uses often lack them (like here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephedrine#Mechanism_of_action ). I wonder if the information simply doesn't exist (might make a good research area for grad students!), if this is from general neglect due to the non-psychiatric nature, or if it is just too hard to find and insufficient. This is a frequent area of annoyance for me as I read about these things as a hobbyist and for personal uses. Currently I've been looking (again) for any information about the TAAR1 receptor vis-a-vis ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylephrine but so far 10 minutes on DuckDuckGo has also failed me. If the information is available, I think this would be a good area for an editing initiative. Cooperdozier (talk) 04:17, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While many of the articles are lacking data table on Wikipedia, some of the linked databases do have the data; my favourite is the BPS/IUPHAR Guide to Pharmacology which has 'biological data' tables for each. Phenylephrine, for example; links to these databases are in the infobox, so are accessible once you know to look there. However, you're right that older drugs have data that is less frequently digitally available. Klbrain (talk) 17:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrotope article

I am not a Wikipedian; but I noticed that the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrotope was in need of important updating, so I added a note to its "Talk" page (the "Bankruptcy and Aftermath" item, which includes links to relevant sources), hoping that the author of the page would automatically be informed, and would update the page.

But 8 weeks later, there is still no change. A Wikipedian whom I asked suggested that I contact you.

(As I say in my note on the Retrotope page, the page on Retrotope's one product, RT001, should be similarly updated.) 2600:1700:B8B8:40:7865:6A2:1C05:5731 (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]