User talk:Slashme

TMBG

Escritoire issues

Hello! You might want to do a Google image search on the word "escritoire". Naming all these desk forms is not easy. --AlainV 03:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Helllo again! If you do a search for escritoire images on Google and look at oh, say a dozen pages of results you'll get mostly fixed desks with legs, and a majority of them will be fairly low ones with only a few layers of small drawers and nooks. Now if you do searches for the same desk name on antiques selling sites, you'll get something more precise. And if you do a search for "escritoire" on an antiques research site like the Getty art and architecture thesaurus (http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/vocabularies/aat/), you'll get this:

escritoires (writing desks, desks, ... Furnishings and Equipment) Note: In modern usage, generally refers to small, portable writing desks that first appeared in 16th-century Europe, and were extremely popular in France in the 18th century. They are generally characterized by having a nest of drawers enclosed in a box, often with a sloping front that is hinged along the bottom edge and may be let down to provide a writing platform. An escritoire was placed on top of a table or had its own legs. Formerly, these small portable desks were also called "secretaries"; however, in modern usage, the term "secretaries" typically refers to larger pieces meant to be placed against a wall.

This is a form of small portable desk, quite different form the one you describe, or the one that usually (but not always) comes up in an image search on the Web. And you'll also find that they establish this definition on research in many printed books:

Aronson, Book of Furniture and Decoration (1952) 207
Fairbanks and Bates, American Furniture (1981) 530
Fleming and Honour, Dictionary of the Decorative Arts (1977) 280
Thornton, 17th C. Interior Decoration (1978) 310
Verlet, 18th C. in France (1967)

Thus, they have reliable sources (some of which I have verified in person local libraries and all of which I have verified on the Web) and this is why I would personaly consider the escritoire in general to be a close sibling to the Campaign desk within the notion of the Portable desk

But at the same time, the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus gives a definition of escritoire for a particular country, France, and it turns out to be a different kind of description from that of the portable desk escritoire, and that defintion too is also based on serious sources.

Again, naming desks is not an easy task. --AlainV 11:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Non-verbal?

Taken from User talk:Hollow Wilerding:

Hi! I noticed your page while looking for HasBeen's mysterious e-teamers.

Keep up the good work! It's people like you that make Wikipedia what it is.
I see you say we should consider ourselves lucky that Wikipedia is not verbal. Au contraire! It is not oral, but it is definitely verbal.

-- "Captain Nitpick" (Slashme 10:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you for the comment! Perhaps you are correct about the verbal statement. No, wait. Not perhaps. You are correct. Thanks for the heads-up. Keep up the good work yourself, too! :) —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

spelling

Thanks for changing my spellings on my talk page

--<marquee>Madcow</marquee> 14:02, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

MSG Reverts

Thank you for the suggestions. I have made the fixes. Please let me know of any other style issues. No need to do a revert, I'll just make the necessary changes. Twoggle 17:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SOD

How come you are interested in SOD? -- Boris 13:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Hi Boris!

I'm a chemical engineer doing a masters' in biochem, recently working at a health foods, dietary supplements and cosmetic company. I was suprised to see that SOD is added to cosmetics, and wanted to find out why. I noticed that the WP page said nothing about topical application, so I checked it out on Google Scholar. --Slashme 13:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)"[reply]
I see, it is good to have pros around editing the articles. You have 5 edits on SOD's article for that day, but i paid attention on the last one only. SOD and cosmetics - skin penitration, even blood injections, interesting. I wasn't suprise though that one of the patient had an alergic reaction, i don't think that they used her own SOD. Now about the references - what's the point of using that {{Journal reference}} template with the bunch of variables?:
#{{note|Topical}} {{Journal reference
| author= F. Campana
| title= Topical superoxide dismutase reduces post-irradiation breast cancer fibrosis
| journal= J. Cell. Mol. Med.
| year= 2004
| volume= 8
| issue= 1
| pages= 109–116}}
instead of using plain text:
# F. Campana (2004). Topical superoxide dismutase reduces post-irradiation breast cancer fibrosis. ''J. Cell. Mol. Med. 8 (1): 109–116''.
although i preffer:
# A microtiter plate assay for superoxide dismutase using a water-soluble tetrazolium salt (WST-1). ''J Cell Mol Med. 2004 Jan-Mar;8(1):109-16;'' [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/utils/lofref.fcgi?PrId=3731&uid=15090266&db=pubmed&url=http://www.jcmm.org/en/pdf/8/1/jcmm008.001.11.pdf Full text (PDF - )]
They both give the same result, pretty much.
^ F. Campana (2004). "Topical superoxide dismutase reduces post-irradiation breast cancer fibrosis". J. Cell. Mol. Med. 8 (1): 109–116.
and
F. Campana (2004). Topical superoxide dismutase reduces post-irradiation breast cancer fibrosis. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 8 (1): 109–116.
The code i use gives this:
A microtiter plate assay for superoxide dismutase using a water-soluble tetrazolium salt (WST-1). J Cell Mol Med. 2004 Jan-Mar; 8(1): 109-16; Full text (PDF - 333kB)
Plz, tell me. I came across this before i asked the guy, she/he never answered back. -- Boris 15:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Philosophy portal

Please read my rationale for removing this template or, if you like, participate in the discussion at User talk:R.Koot#Philosophy portal. Cheers, —Ruud 10:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ruud! I've started a discussion on the issue at Wikipedia_talk:Portal#Use_of_portal_links_on_websites, which I think is the appropriate forum. --Slashme 11:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of minor edit?

Thanks for the reminder to mark edits as minor. Is there anyplace on Wikipedia that defines what constitutes a minor edit? Thanks. Crunch 16:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage vandalism

Just thought I'd let you know your userpage has suffered a spate of vandalism from User:Andynmurph and from 195.195.239.163 whom I presume is Andynmurph when logged out. I've blocked both for 48 hours. David | Talk 11:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paraphernalia

Hi, Slashme. I rolled back your last edit to Childfree, not because it was vandalism, but because the silly word really IS spelled with the "r." I know, it looks odd to me, too. Joyous | Talk 21:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:EscalatorIrony.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:EscalatorIrony.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -SCEhard T 04:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question re protocol

Hi David,

I have finally come back to town and am trying to get back to where I can finish the Feingold Page project. In the meantime all the forms on our site went down, Earthlink couldn't fix anything and we ended up having to change hosting companies, all of which has made more delay. Hopefully, I will be able to start spending more time on here tomorrow. Meanwhile, I have a question how to handle the following page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_dye

In the Health Section of the page they quote studies that are more than 20 years old. And they were some of them bad studies in the first place -- especially the David study, in which he gave coloring to kids who were in the middle of reactions already!! The idea of a challenge study is to give the kids who have improved on the diet something to see if you can undo the improvement. Well, if they haven't improved, what, pray tell, are you proving? He was using as his subjects kids whose parents had seen that diet affects them, but they were not succeeding in implementing dietary changes properly and they had actually gone to Dr. David for help. He put them in his study. It was a cruel and inhumane trick.

There are newer studies .... LOTS of them .... that show that the colorings do indeed affect behavior, and even some that begin to unravel the reasons why. I would like to add them. Besides, there is a lot more to the Feingold diet than just food dye.

However, can I just change this page? Should I add my paragraph after the incorrect one without making a correction but pointing out that it is wrong? Or should I ask that this page be marked "IN DISPUTE" until it can be resolved, since it is not a small change? Thanks Shulae 14:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your answer re the food dyes protocol. I've been sort of busy trying to get our website back on track, we have to change servers, our order forms had been inoperable for a month thanks to Earthlink's incompetence, and I've been taking the heat .... one of these days soon I will be caught up enough to put the effort into finishing the relevant wikipedia pages -- I haven't forgotten. Shulae 18:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Wilks

Hi, it's been noticed that Mike Wilks has been disambiguated, however, could you please move Michael Sharod Wilks to Mike Wilks (basketball)? The article title Michael Sharod Wilks is improper; the formal name the basketball player goes by (Mike Wilks), plus the modifier (basketball) would be most ideal as the title. Also could you amend all the links you've modified to reflect the change? Thanks.... :-)

Posted by 203.214.2.144 on 17 March 2003, answered on user's talk page.

Myofiril.png

Hi Cohesion,

You removed the speedy delete request on Myofibril.png, saying "Please link the new image". If by that you mean that the .svg must be used in the article, and that the .png mustn't link anywhere, that's already done. If that wasn't what you were talking about, please explain.

Thanks, Slashme 14:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry I wasn't clear, I just meant to link the new version in the speedy delete request so I could make sure it existed, like "Image obsoleted by smilyface.jpg". I personally don't like deleting an image that is obsoleted without making sure there is actually a new version. It's deleted already though, so it's all ok :) - cohesion^t 18:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

IP address (155.232.250.51) of router ten-cache1-vif-3.tenet.saix.net was blocked due do vandalism. --Slashme 17:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look and the IP you've given has not been blocked, does the block message give more detail. e.g. Autoblocked because.. i.e. Which user caused the original block. --pgk^(talk) 10:59, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the book question

Yikes -- I don't understand anything about copyrights. The book is self-published by "Pear Tree Press" which is Jane's own company. We have the first 46 or so pages available on line to read, and the book can be ordered usually either through us or through Amazon. I can link to the free pages from a picture of the book -- that was my first idea, but I didn't know if it was okay to do. You can see the book at http://www.feingold.org/book.html and notice the link to "read it here."

So -- can I use the picture? Can I allow people to read it?

I also have another book, which is on line totally on our site. I wrote it with a committee, so it belongs to Feingold, but it is available to download, or it is available for free by request. You can see it at http://www.feingold.org/Bluebook/blue.html .... again, I don't quite understand the copyright status, or even if it would be appropriate to mention the availability of this book in an encyclopedia. Shulae 17:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(reply on Shula's talk page)

Garbling Unicode re: Obesity

When you edited Obesity to change references, you garbled the Unicode in the interwiki links [1]. I suspect you may have loaded the page into an editor that doesn't support Unicode, or perhaps you're using a very old browser? -- Curps 16:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Ref converter

No bother, glad you liked it. Thanks! Blackcap (talk) 17:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

note on my talk page

Hi David,

I answered your last note (my answer in boxes) on the discussion page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feingold_diet/Objections. I haven't tried the citation yet, but I will do it that way. Shulae 17:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re studies

Hi David,

I don't have PDF copies (good idea .... but if I post them on line without permission isn't that a copyright problem?)

But I do have quite a few studies -- you mean the full text, right?

I can fax them to you if you give me a fax number

Happy to do it until you say "uncle"

ShulaShulae 15:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

references

Hi David,

I am confused about what I see in the references. There are up-arrows, but they don't go anywhere.

Should I link to the study (an external link) from the reference citation? Or is that an "outside link?"

I am also a little uncertain how to reference the Feingold Program materials and/or Foodlist when it is updated continuously and any date I put will be outdated shortly but the new one will be just as appropriate (interesting that Quackwatch chose to link to materials from 1986)

Should I put the references in alphabetic order, in date order, or in order that they are mentioned? Some of the studies listed are now no longer referred to; should they be removed? There are a lot more studies that could be discussed, but I think this article may already be overly long.

One more thing -- one of our own volunteers is nervous that in the paragraph where I describe the materials that the Feingold Assn provides for doing the diet, it may sound like an "advertisement." I thought it was a straightforward explanation of what you get for use in doing the diet. If I have overstepped, however, please advise.

Thanks,

Shulae 16:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question re Feingold bio

Hi David,

On the Feingold biography page, at bottom, there is an external link to the Feingold Association - that would be appropriate, I think, because that is the organization teaching his diet. However, there is also a link to the NIH consensus development conference back in 1982 .... there is no link to the one in 1998. I would think both would be irrelevant anyhow, since the actual discussion of whether the diet "works" or not is on a different page. Is there any reason I cannot take it off of this bio page?

Thanks,

Shulae 16:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the ADHD page

Hi David,

On the other ADHD page ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder there is a paragraph about Feingold Diet, and there is a reference to a more recent meta analysis (analyzing the same tired old 30-yr-old studies, but at least including a few of the newer ones) ... but there is a problem, and I don't want to tear it up; it isn't actually negative or "against" Feingold - in fact it is rather supportive as these things go, but it is also not accurate.

It says:

 A recent literature review notes that a possible reason for the lack of evidence for the 
 Feingold Diet may be because research has focussed on food dyes, despite the diet eliminating 
 a wide variety of foods, including most processed foods[23]. For example, adherance to the 
 diet would drastically reduce intake of refined sugar

Now here's the thing .... the Feingold Program does NOT eliminate "most processed foods" - you just have to learn to make choices - that's why we have a team of product info volunteers at Feingold, to bring you the acceptable PROCESSED foods. You would not need us if you cooked everything from scratch, made your own mayonnaise, etc. This was accurate 25 years ago, maybe.

Because we do not eliminate sugar, and we do NOT eliminate processed foods, we are NOT drastically reducing intake of refined sugar. We have nothing against refined sugar. In fact, the place I eat more candy, cookies and junk food all year is at the annual Feingold Conference.

So - any suggestions? I don't want to get argumentative about it, but it isn't accurate either.

Shulae 03:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my answers

Hi David,

I think you missed my answer re the PDF files of the studies (See #21 "re studies" as well as 22 23 24) .... you probably only looked at the last question, but I had a whole collection of 'em.

I can make you PDF's of any studies you want, or I can fax them to you. I made some yesterday -- Rowe 1994 and Goyette 1978

I put some notes on the Goyette study - just could not resist.

See the page listing studies at www.diet-studies.com/adhd.html .... I don't have all the studies, but I will start PDFing them one by one - it was fun. Shulae 12:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the pdf's

sorry -- I had an extra letter in there. It should have been www.diet-studies.com/PDFstudies/goyette.pdf

I will work on them -- it's a project I have wanted to do anyhow, so I am glad you are "forcing" me to do it. They will be in both Word and PDF so you can have them however you wish. I don't know which takes up less space.

Shulae 17:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South African Farmer Murders

Hey David,

Sure, I'll keep an eye on it. I just updated the references to the new style, let me know if there's anything else in the article that needs to be fixed. Cheers, —Khoikhoi 18:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Are you from South Africa? —Khoikhoi 19:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editing

Hi David,

I haven't looked at it yet, though I am having some trouble figuring out how changing the line length could look like an evil plot to get the food industry in here ..... yikes. Well, I'm glad you warned me.

The paragraph in the ADHD page right above the Feingold parag, labeled "Alternatives" which is the intro to the section is really really awful. I think it would behoove Wikipedia to acknowledge that there is a TURF WAR in medicine ... that no matter how many research studies are done on a therapy labeled "alternative" it will remain "alternative" simply because it is the Medical Boards who make that decision, under the thumbs of the Quackwatch people, who are an arm of the pharmaceutical industry. I know that sounds paranoid, and when I first heard it I said "prove it" -- and they proved it. I am just alerting you to it now ... look at the unprofessional tone of that paragraph at least, labeling all alternatives as quacks basically. I am not addressing it now, maybe somebody else will. I want to "choose my battles" and the next project is to get all the nice studies I have to you. PDF here I come!! Shulae 19:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Wait -- if  you want me to email them TO you, I need an email address.  Otherwise, I can
 upload them to my site in the PDFstudies folder and just send you the link.  For 
 educational purposes, in school, we had no problem making copies and sharing studies, so 
 this should be about the same.  If I'm wrong, let me know.  Shulae 19:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(1) Bateman study (2004):free on MedLine

(2) Is food intolerance due to an inborn error of metabolism? 
      Breakey j, Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2004;13(Suppl):S175.

This is the abstract - I don't find the whole study, but I have some others from her. She likes to say that it is BECAUSE the newer studies "broadened" the number of things eliminated that the diet works ..... she either believes that it didn't work well before, or she just doesn't want to argue about it. In truth, the diet ALWAYS eliminated a number of things beyond just coloring, but the early studies looked only at the coloring. Anyhow, you will see the word "oligoantigenic" in some studies. All it means is "few foods" -- they eliminated everything we do, plus some other allergenic foods, like soy, eggs, milk, wheat ... usually by allowing only about 8 foods during the study -- ugh. They always get about the same percentages of success as we do anyhow.

 (3) MedLine: The role of diet and behaviour in childhood. 
      Breakey j. J Paediatr Child Health. 1997 Jun;33(3):190-4. 
      Full text of study in PDF

 (4) Outcome-based comparison of Ritalin versus food-supplement treated children with AD/HD.
      Harding KL, Judah RD, Gant C. Altern Med Rev. 2003 Aug;8(3):319-30.
      Full Text

 (5) Effects of artificial colors on hyperkinetic children: a double-blind challenge study
      Goyette GH, Connors CK, Petti TA, Curtis LE., 
      Psychopharmacol Bull. 1978 Apr;14(2):39-40.
      Full Text

The "challenge" dose of food dyes is not specified, but implied to be 13 mg. This tiny amount still resulted in a trend of performance deficits on a visual motor tracking task after challenge but not after placebo. The deficits were more pronounced in younger children. This is not surprising because 13 mg is a larger "dose" per body weight for a smaller child.

See their conclusions: "...suggesting that artificial food dyes do indeed impair and disrupt the behavior of the children..."

 (6) Weiss 1994 - abstract only

 (7) Food dyes impair performance of hyperactive children on a laboratory learning test. 
      Swanson JM, Kinsbourne M. Science. 1980 Mar 28;207(4438):1485-7.
      Full Text

Swanson told us at our conference, that he had been threatened never to do another study like that, or he would be blackballed and never be funded again. He was also told that he had used so much food dye that it was a "toxic effect" and that it was simply a really bad study. He believed it, I guess - because he co-authored a book about ADHD in 1999 in which he did not even mention his own study. I spoke to him by phone some years ago, and told him that we had measured how much food dye powder would be needed to make frosting red (155 mg per TB) and ketchup green (150 mg per TB), and we had also color-matched Red Koolaid (20 mg per cup).... he did the math and almost shouted, "I didn't do a bad study!! These kids can easily get several hundred mg coloring per day!!" I told him that if his 150 mg was "toxic" then we seriously needed to re-think what we are allowing in the food and candies.