Jump to content

User talk:MartinezMD

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 202.81.243.196 (talk) at 01:49, 12 August 2013 (→Revert: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Welcome...

Hello, MartinezMD, 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:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username 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! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have been here for a while, and no one has welcomed you .... so I will .... thank you for your help in vandal fighting. Best of luck and happy editing! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Notes

{{cite web}}

Wikipedia:Article wizard

WP:ACT WP:REFACTOR

[1]

  1. ^ Lebel MH (1988). "Dexamethasone therapy for bacterial meningitis. Results of two double-blind, placebo-controlled trials". The New England Journal of Medicine. 319 (15): 964–971. PMID 3047581. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/319/15/964

Volume 319:964-971 October 13, 1988 Number 15

Dexamethasone therapy for bacterial meningitis. Results of two double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

MH Lebel, BJ Freij, GA Syrogiannopoulos, DF Chrane, MJ Hoyt, SM Stewart, BD Kennard, KD Olsen, and GH McCracken

On David Cook

I'd say, on an original research level, hard rock is a more defensible category. Both "Kiss on the Neck" and "Bar-Ba-Sol" are definitively hard songs, and others could potentially be viewed that way. Still, you're correct in your reversion of the IPs addition, since we definitely don't allow original research. :) Cheers, SDJ 15:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DC sales figures have went up and are at now 892,000, you need to pay more attention to his official sales if you believe that he is still at 842,000.... Dragonus456 (talk) 14:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get my info from DC's official site and fansite, also from Nielson Soundscan and Hits Daily Double and Billboard, i didnt think to put references, and that article that said he has sold 842,000 is been out for about 3 weeks, he sells about 30,000 copy's a week now... Dragonus456 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

On sulfuric acid

Thanks for the correction, and for being polite- I was at fault. :) Freestyle-69 (talk) 07:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Thank you for contributing to our articles. If you are interested in making more contributions on cell biology and biochemistry topics, you might want to join the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject (signup here). You will be most welcome. - Tim Vickers (talk) 17:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medical related articles you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (signup here).


--David Ruben Talk 19:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation templates

Hi,

Just a note, if you're going to add references to pages like you did at sickle cell disease, that's fantastic, thanks! You may want to use citation templates, which allow standard formatting of different types of sources - this can be helpful for print readers and generally makes wikipedia look more professional. Particularly if you are going to use articles and citations derived from PubMed, one great and easy way to create the templates is diberri's template filler. All you need is the pubmed number (but it also works with an ISBN and a couple other identifying numbers) and it'll create the template for you using info from pubmed. Very handy and quick. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 18:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DeLorean DMC-12

Hi :) look HERE please

thanks

ciao --Pava (talk) 12:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we must adapt to the standard, nowadays is for designers who designs the body (but not only the style, but the arrangement of books and technical solutions / aero), and then often (for some other cars ) mechanics are derived from other models. thus being the template in a summary page, we take Giugiaro in the template and then in the voice explains everything well, ok? ( sorry my english not is very well) --Pava (talk) 14:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish charts

Re: [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Boom_Boom_Pow&diff=313611897&oldid=313610752 this edit}. The PROMUSICAE charts for Spain are fine, and are listed at WP:GOODCHARTS. It's the Los 40 Principales chart that is listed at WP:BADCHARTS.—Kww(talk) 20:03, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with dermatology-related content

Are you interested in dermatology-related content? I am looking for more help at the dermatology task force, particularly with our new Bolognia push 2009! Perhaps you would you be able to help us? ---kilbad (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Retain

Hello, MartinezMD. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Shortcut.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


New

Omental infarct

Minotaur

Sorry, I goofed. I agree, it doesn't belong; I thought I was removing it, was instead reinstating it. -- Elphion (talk) 23:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Aside from the vandals, it's all Good Faith. I appreciate the work you and the other editors do. :) --MartinezMD (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, MartinezMD. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Book Additions

MartinezMD,

Ah - fair enough - seems I skipped over the regulations before adding my links. My mistake - and I apologize for the inconvenience!

ISandusky (talk) 18:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTE

After adding a book I read recently to the list of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction I noticed that you promptly removed the book on grounds of WP:NOTE and have removed other books from the list as well. However WP:NOTE seems to specifically apply to whether or not something (a book in this case) is notable enough to have it's own article. The notability rules do not seem to apply to mentioning a book, which would not be notable enough for an article of its own, in a list. Any thoughts on this before I go and re-add the book to the list? --41.34.123.77 (talk) 09:39, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Synthetic Cannabis

Thanks for catching that--actually, what happened was that a prior editor added info about Oregon, amounting to about 3 separate paragraphs. Instead, I cut it down to a single sentence and integrated it with the previous paragraph. I thought I deleted all of the left over excess, but I missed that part. Thanks for taking it out--i think the 1 sentence in the paragraph, along with the other states, is sufficient. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:11, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cimarron Firearms

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cimarron Firearms requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Nat Gertler (talk) 01:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lupinus

Hi, why did you undo my edit in Lupinus? This is not politics, the name tells it all, whether you like it or not. It you look at what's called Judean mountains, this is the West Bank (i.e. Palestine), not Israel. عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Bala S. Manian

Hello MartinezMD. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Bala S. Manian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Splitsville

Please read wp:CSD. While the article clearly has issues, and may be appropriate for article for deletion, it is not a wp:csd. Thank you. --CutOffTies (talk) 19:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tuskegee syphilis experiment

Hi Doc,

We seem to share similar concerns with this article. I am continually amazed that such an important article is so poorly written. I have no scientific training to speak of but am primarily editing it for readability and as always, I continue to work to ensure NPOV, my pet peeve. Please let me know if my edits cause problems on the scientific and medical side as I am always happy to play well with other editors. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 07:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reading your page, it seems we have a lot in common. I am moderate/neutral in many things, and WP would be useless if bias were allowed unchecked in it. The Tuskegee study was a disgrace and should be accurately/neutrally presented so we can learn from it. I'll let you know if any technical aspects need correcting, and I am very agreeable in collaborating on a well-written article.MartinezMD (talk) 08:24, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JWH-018

Quantitation of any drug and nearly any chemical in urine is very much an issue for analytical toxicologists occupied in clinical, forensic or industrial toxicology. Numerous quantitative thresholds exist for the presence in urine of xenobiotics, in the sports, legal, industrial and medical arenas. Urine alcohol quantitation is very frequently performed in the US, and states such as California prosecute drivers if their urine alcohol levels exceed a particular value. Urinary drug concentrations are a major part of the NIDA regulations in the US, which are applied to determining the future job prospects of the millions of Americans subjected to drug testing each year. The World Anti-Doping Agency has set quantitative thresholds for many drugs in the urine of the hundreds of thousands of athletes tested in national and international games. The occupational safety regulations in many countries have specific quantitative limits for the presence of numerous chemicals in the urine of workers. I could continue ad infinitum, but perhaps you see the point. Please leave in the sentence re the lack of quantitation, it is important. Hetoi (talk) 11:45, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't see your point. I am a clinical toxicologist by training, so I understand these issues a great deal more than the general public or even many professionals in medical fields. If you can measure a serum level, you can measure a urine level. The difference is if they hold any value, and that alters if they are normally performed. If a statement is made that urine levels are typically not tested that can be argued, but to say it can't be done is an entirely different story. I'm also not sure what your agenda is in regards to the statement. Perhaps is you clarified that we could come to some agreement. Also, this discussion should be held on the topic's talk page instead of mine.MartinezMD (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Waffle Disease

I saw that you undid my edit on the trichomoniasis article where I pointed out that it is also known under the slang name "Blue Waffle Disease". I saw that you stated that the edit was "unreliable". I wanted to first apologize that I did not cite the edit. I found that it might be difficult to "cite" slang considering that slang is not normally documented, but I did find at least one website online that supports this claim (see here: http://nonoy.net/blue-waffle-infection-disease/). I also from experience have heard laymen refer to it as "blue waffle disease" when discussing it. The term normally only is used by the layman when there is obvious bruising of the delicate tissues of the labia minora.

I did not revert the edit back as I think I've done something wrong here trying to add to the article. Can you explain or help me out for future reference how to better cite slang terms in wiki articles?

ThoHug (talk) 00:39, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've done nothing seriously wrong, but when you look up your reference it doesn't come back as Trichomonas. In fact, it specifically says it is something else. There are also numerous other references on the internet to it, but it varies from just ugly vaginal pictures to yeast infections, etc. Since this is a medical article, and it can have personal consequences for people, it follows more stringent standards.MartinezMD (talk) 01:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mad Max II

You might want to join in with the discussion on the Mad Max 2 page, then. But I'm not sure what someone's wife being dead, etc., has to do with whether something came about because of a nuclear holocaust. Either the movie's plot is shaped by a nuclear holocaust or not, which seems to be quite separate from whether someone's family is murdered by a biker gang. Ommnomnomgulp (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was just stating how the character and storyline are the same. I've joined the MMII talk page. MartinezMD (talk) 19:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Nye

I appreciate your comments, but the information presented is widely and commonly known to be factually accurate, so it wasn't 'likely to be challenged' except by the mentally challenged. I'm sorry your ego can't handle reasonable criticism. Tkircher (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may be common knowledge within the nuclear power community, but WP is an encyclopedia for the world at large. You can also keep your insults to yourself.MartinezMD (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OT Navy work in progress

Hello, MartinezMD. You have new messages at Geofferybard's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gardel

Thanks for your work patrolling Carlos Gardel. I can only say that Uruguayan (Gardel) 'birthers' are even more persistent than Australian soccer fans. Tapered (talk) 00:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First Solar

Hi there, MartinezMD. I have been contacted by First Solar about the current situation on the First Solar Wikipedia article, and I've agreed to help. I have spoken with Alan Bernheimer (User:Abernheimer) and I am satisfied that his goal, and that of First Solar, is simply for this Wikipedia article to be more authoritative, accurate and factual. It is also my understanding that they want to fix the problems associated with the current warning tag. I've previously helped other subjects of Wikipedia articles follow consensus and work with the community to fix those pages, and I think with a bit of effort the same could be done here.

Because I now have a potential conflict of interest with this subject matter, I'm not the best person to determine what needs to change before the warning template can be removed. Although some issues stand out to me, I wonder if you'd like to make a list of things to change and post that on the First Solar discussion page? If you're too busy on other projects, I can ask COI/N for help, too. Let me know what you think; if I don't hear back after the U.S. holiday weekend, I'll just head over there. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 17:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
MartinezMD, I had no idea editing a page to show my novel was inappropriate. I certainly meant no harm. The novel, Shut Down, remains an apocalyptic novel ... so how does it get added to the list? William Flynn Wrflynn (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
I now fully understand.

"Shut Down" is slowly picking up steam. The Multnomah County library system has reviewed the work and acquired six copies (This is a very rare honor reserved for selected, well-known authors). Local media has offered strikingly positive reviews, and sales locally have been brisk, to put it mildly.

But I realize WP is worldwide, so I'll wait until interest spreads beyond Portland. I'm posting here because I don't know how else to contact you. Happy reading ... btw, it's on kindle too. :)

Thank you for your kind patience with this new wiki editor. Oh, I just learned what a barnstar is. Wrflynn (talk) 00:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for taking care of vandalism / poor edits. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Gardel origin

Carlos Gardel birthplace is well established as being Tacuarembo, Uruguay as proved by his passport and birth certificate (https://sites.google.com/site/eluruguayocarlosgardel/-documentos-oficiales-de-garlos-gardel/-e-el-ultimo-documento-de-gardel---pasaporte-encontrado-entre-sus-ropas-en-medellin), now, if you are going to discredit the facts as being made up or false, then you should also decline to have the french evidence as factual therefore concluding the origin of his birthplace as either unknown, or not established as of yet. You must provide just and factual information which is not what you are doing here. You can not tip the scale to one side unless there is substantial, factual, and conclusive evidence to the history, otherwise you are misinforming the public.

Sincerely

Gustavo33or. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gustavo33or (talk • contribs) 00:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Dr. Martínez, he pasado años investigando la encefalopatía de Wernicke que solo se diagnostica en el 85% de los casos, afecta al 2% de las poblaciones y es letal en el 17% de los casos. Parece una paradoja que teniendo tanta prevalencia se sepa poco, se subdiagnostique y submedique. Mi monografía ha interesado a profesores de varios países y a BMJ (la división editorial de la Sociedad Médica Británica), quienes me han honrado solicitándome la revisión de monografías neurológicas, situación reservada a los referentes en medicina.

Para ahorrar muchos sufrimientos y vidas deseo publicar lo más avanzado del conocimiento de EW en Wikipedia. Si cuento con su colaboración habré de hacerlo con gusto, pero no voy a estar lidiando con quienes borren mis aportes (el listado que eliminó era solo la primera etapa del cambio). Si hay comprensión publicaré lo que muchos consideran lo más avanzado al respecto. Le saludo atte. Luis (puede pedirme información o documentos de lo que afirmo). Luis cerni (talk) 01:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
REITERACION

Hay 3 páginas sobre la misma enfermedad. Eso si que necesita intervención.

Wernicke–Korsakoff syndrome

Wernicke–Korsakoff Syndrome

Korsakoff's syndrome

Las dos primeras solo se diferencian por una mayúscula y la tercera se refiere a lo mismo con otro nombre. Cheers, Luis 

Luis cerni (talk) 01:50, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Hi! I noticed on my watchlist that you reverted an IP edit here. Was that intentional? I don't think I see anything wrong with the edit itself. Jafeluv (talk) 18:46, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point was adding a sort key to make the article appear at the top of the category. (You can see this at Category:Jazz standards now that I've redone the edit.) The practice is explained at WP:SORTKEY (bullet point #6). It's not that uncommon, although it's understandable if you've never run into the syntax before. So now you know :) Jafeluv (talk) 06:43, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

When you revert an edit that someone spent a lot of work on improving an article, at least have the basic courtesy to make an edit comment to explain your objection. 202.81.243.196 (talk) 01:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MartinezMD&oldid=568149809"