User talk:Graham Beards/archive 7

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thriller (album)

Thank you for your constructive suggestions, I have implemented as many as possible. I'm a little confused by one or two of your suggestions, I imagine this is confusion on my part. I hope you could return and take a look at my feedback. Thank you. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 19:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi GrahamColm. Can you just hide your comments in this FAC to save space? Thank you. --Efe (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, capping doesn't save any space and my comments are not long enough to justify it. Only very long and resolved comments should be capped and then at the reviewer's and FAC directors's discretion. GrahamColm^Talk 13:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

It actually does, and it reduces mess because of some striked-out comments. Well, its up to you but reviewers can hide their comments using {{hidden}}. Regards, --Efe (talk) 12:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Introduction to virus

I have made some minor changes, but I didn't find any major issues with the article. Gary King (talk) 21:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks Gary, :) Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 21:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Graham, Re: The introduction to virus intro, (keeping it to 4 paragraphs) who said this? this does not strike me as being as important as making sense of the introduction, splitting it into more paragraphs improves readability (I thought) and I also noticed some clumsy wording is creeping in as well as the complexity is startting to overshadow the "introduction" concept. Anyway I just thought I'd adjust a few things to get back into viruses, but if it is creating issues, just tell me and I'll reduce my interaction with the editing. Cheers!--Read-write-services (talk) 22:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Graham, there are missing PMIDs. Have you seen Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a lot better now. Besides the missing PMIDs, check you overuse of italics (see WP:ITALICS) and check the wikilinking. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you have your work cut out for you at your FAC :p Gary King (talk) 06:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Well at least it's raining today, but seriously those comments are very good and clearly from intelligent non-experts, which is just what the article needs. Question, how do you link to a section of another article? Thanks for your help with the article Gary. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 06:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

To link to a section, just use the "#" symbol. So it would be Virus#Etymology, which you can also pipe to be Virus etymology. Gary King (talk) 06:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Trump Chicago

I found a few of your edits to be mildly ungrammatical or stylistically disagreeable. However, I endorse most of the changes. Can you describe the preference for "on" instead of "upon". I would, of course, appreciate further feedback and editorial assistance as well as eventual support or at least removed objection. I have moved your talk page issues to the FAC discussion. I have responded to issues there.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your recent editorial contributions. Your changes are in conflict with another editors changes. You have yet to explain your preference for on versus upon Since I hope for support from both of you we need to work this out. You have not returned to the article. Your further participation would be appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not going to lose any sleep over "on" or "upon", but I notice that there are still many mistakes in the article. Here's an example:- Although there were demands from citizens organizations - where's the possessive? GrahamColm^Talk 15:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you going to respond as to whether I have addressed any of your other concerns?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I have noted in the FAC discussion that you have been unwilling to point to examples of your claim of unintelligibility and have only pointed to a missing apostrophe while refusing to respond with an opinion of my revisions in response to your statements.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Another editor has made 100 edits on the article in the last 48 hours to copyedit it. Your reconsideration of your support would be appreciated.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the FAC is not a vote, but an attempt to achieve consensus. No doubt the FAC Director, or his deputy, will take any improvements into account when deciding to promote or archive. I looked at the article again this morning and remain unconvinced of it readiness to be featured. I have stopped watching the FAC discussion because I find the responses to many of the (valid) criticisms, uncivil. GrahamColm^Talk 16:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment

Thank you for investing time on the Thriller FA review, I was quite supprised by your helpful response, oddly we have never crossed paths before. I recently put the Michael Jackson article up for peer review. If you ever have time I would love to hear your thought on the article, I plan to take it to FA at some point. Regards. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 04:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Graham, recently you supported the Thriller (album) nomination for FA believing it to be a good read and I was quite struck that you went out of your own way to correct errors. Unfortunately I withdrew the nomination because of an unforeseen busy schedule and didn't have time to correct certain comment/requests; I will be renominating it in the future so I hope you will still consider supporting then. Now I have nominated Michael Jackson for FA and would love to hear your feedback on it. Whatever your opinion, good or bad, I look forward to hearing from you and hope that you find the Jackson article to be as strong as the Thriller article. — Realist² (Speak) 20:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'll take a look at the article tomorrow night, (UK time), Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 22:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. — Realist² (Speak) 22:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Apologises

Ah, my response was with respect to the fact you cited it as vandalism. Since you were deleting what appeared to a casual observer to be solid information I figured there had been a reversion mistake. -Rushyo (talk) 06:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, no problem, and thanks again for watching. The information is correct, but most of it was already there. I'll have to be more careful with my edit summaries. Once again thanks for being vigilant. I have to go to work know. Best wishes. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 06:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Third FA for the Everglades project!

Way to go team! Restoration of the Everglades has just become an FA! Three down and two to go! Geography and ecology of the Everglades and Everglades could use your eagle eyes! Awadewit (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Proposals

Please comment on the current FA-Team proposals. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 16:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to virus

I have finished revisiting my list. I struck out the things that had been addressed. Awadewit (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, Awadewit. GrahamColm^Talk 16:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		Thanks for making the fascinating topic of viruses accessible to a wide audience. Your clear, evocative writing will bring the world of viruses into high relief for readers and may even prompt some young readers to become microbiologists. You could be the Carl Sagan of the microworld. :) Awadewit (talk) 17:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team successes!

Indigenous people of the Everglades region, Draining and development of the Everglades and Restoration of the Everglades have all recently become FAs! King Arthur is now at FAC! Thanks to our hard-working team members! Awadewit (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, this is really working. I'm busy with a virus FAC at the moment, (as you know ;)), I'll try to get to Arthur later. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 18:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Once more intro to virus

Thanks for your message. I'm now working my way through my earlier comments. I've taken to making very small stylistic tweaks to the article itself; if you think that's not helpful, just drop me a note. I'll likely not find the time to get through all the comments today, though. Markus Poessel (talk) 14:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was pretty much in real time. Only one comment remaining, then. Markus Poessel (talk) 21:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Markus, seriously, thanks so much for help with this, when you live among the trees it can be very hard to see the forest. You have been a great critic. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 21:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Virus

Of course, I've already scanned the article, and I think its nicely written. The prose as a whole cannot match that of the virus article, but I believe it is satisfactory enough. I will most likely leave a full review on the article's FAC when time permits. --haha169 (talk) 21:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ;). GrahamColm^Talk 21:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The Greencards FAC follow up

Hi! You weighed in on the The Greencards FAC previously, here. I'm fairly sure I've gotten I believe all the FAC suggestions remedied, and began a peer review as well. Would you mind taking another glance and letting me know on the peer review or my talk what else may need doing, before I go back to FAC? Thank you! rootology (T) 03:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

Well done on getting Introduction to virus to FA. You put in a lot of effort before and during FAC. An important topic is now very accessible. Colin°^Talk 07:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Good morning Colin, thanks, nice news to wake up to. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 07:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Mastermind?

I presume you mean the programme, not the article? If so, it's a non-starter I'm afraid. I'd go to pieces in front of a TV camera, and my general knowledge isn't that good. But thanks for the compliment. Brianboulton (talk) 20:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, but allow me to unofficially award you with the lump of glass anyway. :) Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 20:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to MCB

Hi Graham, welcome to the Wikiproject! Tim Vickers (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, I hope I can be useful. Graham. GrahamColm^Talk 19:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Everglades Barnstar

		The Everglades Barnstar
		"It's curious that the ignorance about the Everglades has persisted all these years"—Marjory Stoneman Douglas, 1987. Thank you, GrahamColm, for helping in our small wiki-corner, to right that wrong. Your support and helpful comments during FAC for the articles are very appreciated. Please accept this limited-edition barnstar as a token of my gratitude. --Moni3 (talk) 12:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Hey I found you on the Michael Jackson FAC page. I noticed that when you click on "talk" in your signature, it's a redlink. The reason for that, I realized, is because you left a space in your username in the link, when there is no space in your username. You may want to fix that so people can edit your talkpage conveniently from your signature. Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 18:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks, (how did that happen??), Graham GrahamColm^Talk 18:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses)

Thanks for the copyedit! Gary King (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. Feel free to revert/correct, it's not my subject—I'm a Pink Floyd man. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson

Micheal's little sister is up for peer review. Would you mind giving your input? Wikipedia:Peer review/Janet Jackson/archive1. Thankyou. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:25, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team Mission 5: Solar solicitude/solidarity

Hi Graham,

As an FA-Team member, I'm soliciting your help with FA-Team Mission 5 on Scattered disc and Solar energy (and possibly others). Your plain English skills would be much appreciated in these technical articles. Please sign up on the mission page and watchlist the mission page and articles if you are interested in helping out. Geometry guy 15:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

New FA-Team mission needs your help!

Félix Houphouët-Boigny needs to be copyedited and peer reviewed. We would appreciate any and all help from the crack members of the FA-Team! Sign up here. Merci! Awadewit (talk) 12:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me and by the way....

Hi Graham, I just added a new "background" section to the Thriller album, see here. I was hoping you could give it a quick copy edit and correct my errors (I always make them). Also, I tried to link to your talk page using your signature but your talk page came up as a red link, non created page. I think you need to correct the formatting on your signature. Also, Michael Jackson recently became featured, thank you for your support regarding that. — Realist² (Speak) 00:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

FAR listing

Helicobacter pylori has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.. I know you're one busy busy editor, but I'd like to see if we could save this article from delisting. I think it was made FA 3 or 4 years ago, and either wasn't the quality we expect today or it has deteriorated over the years. It wasn't filled with cruft and vandalism like other articles, but it is a mess. If you've got time, please help out. SandyGeorgia mentioned something about a bribe for you, but I'm not sure of the ethics.  :) OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 05:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, I'm happy to help out with this one, it's a bug I know a little about. I'll make a start later, at the moment I'm busy with viruses and bacteria in real life. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Ah, Graham; I hope that's work related, and doesn't mean you're ill. If you are, feel better soon! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Or maybe research? OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 00:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for your concern, I should have said other people's bacteria and viruses :) Graham Colm ^Talk 05:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Whew ... just checking :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Insidelouvrepyramid2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Insidelouvrepyramid2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. ViperSnake151 18:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand how a photograph of me, owned by me and uploaded by me can be considered copyright violation. ??? Graham Colm ^Talk 20:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

This FAC, which you commented on, has been restarted.

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SummerSlam (2003).S_RX 18:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Survey request

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, Sam4bc (talk) 22:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I have had a look, it will take more than a few minutes, but I will respond later. Graham Colm ^Talk 09:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Your powerful brain is needed

Hey Mr. Medical. I've had a burr of a paragraph in an article stuck to my backside for a while. I'm not sure what to do about it. There's some information on epidemiology that I don't think I'm going to understand. The article is And the Band Played On, specifically this section. Apparently the author, Randy Shilts, misunderstood some epidemiological terminology, and there's an article by Andrew Ross in the American Journal of Epidemiology explaining Shilts' mistakes, but I think it might be over my head. Admittedly, I haven't read it, but I used to work in a medical library and I'm going to have to say most of the articles are pretty far over my head. At any rate, I need to rewrite that section with a better explanation, and I was hoping you could help. Thoughts? --Moni3 (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Graham; I pointed Moni to Eubulides. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

New York State Route 373

I've done a full copyedit, see if that helps. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• OK I'll take a look now. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• Can you fix this problem in the Lead?

While it connects directly with US 9, a reference route, New York State Route 912T acts as a second off-ramp, connecting to NY 373 from a more southerly point on US&nbsp:;9. NY 373 is the only connector to the hamlet of Port Kent and the ferry that serves it. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• Forgive me for being blunt, but I don't think the copy-edit helped. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Tamil people

Hi, since you made your comments on FAC, a lot has changed, can you take another look at it please ? Taprobanus (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I see LaserBrain has added some useful comments. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Pilot (30 Rock)

I've noticed you've been copy-editing this article. Thanks so much, it's much appreciated. I was wondering if you could please go through the newly expanded production section and make any changes that you feel necessary please. I'm about to go through it myself. -- ^[User]Jamie JCA_[Talk] 21:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I've read it a couple of times and I can't see any problems there. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Red-necked Grebe

Many thanks jimfbleak (talk) 05:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Canine parvovirus

I am attempting to get this article up to atleast GA standard and possibly to A. While I have good knowledge of the topic, my english. ie construction is admittedly poor. I wondered if you could review the article and just add a list of suggestions to the TODO list on Talk. I didnt want to start a formal peer review process, I am not sure the article is quite up to that yet. There is some interest in this virus, due to its inherently high rate of mutation and recent resurgance in most countries in a new form (less compatible with vaccination) benjicharlton (talk) 00:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• Rather than add to the TODO list, (which I'll take a look at later), I have made these changes, [1] to the article. The section that will be most difficult for readers is the one that I have re-named Virology, and I think here is were the most work needed. When editing the article I think it is important to distinguish between parvovirus the virus and parvovirus the disease; sometimes this distinction is lost. Be careful about giving advice, (Wikipedia tries not to do this); instead describe common practise. I've added the article to my watchlist and if I find the time, I'll work on the virology with you. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• PS. I've taken on the GA review and promoted the article. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

GrahamColm/Top

A tag has been placed on GrahamColm/Top, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a user page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a regular Wikipedia article rather than a user page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

I know that this was a page move due to a simple mistake, but I think that I'm supposed to notify you just in case. Cheers! Apparition11 (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

"Deja Vu"

Now an FA. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 00:10, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For fixing the image on my user page. I didn't realise it had been replaced with a revised version. Graham87 11:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. Graham Colm ^Talk 11:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Poliovirus

Hi Graham,

I noticed that you nominated this article for GA. Thanks. I have made a couple of comments on the GA page, and again would be happy to assist in changes. BTW, you do know that poliomyelitis and related topics are being developed into a Wikipedia Featured Topic? Project page here if you are interested. Cheers!!--DO11.10 (talk) 17:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi D011.10,

Nice to hear from you. I had been thinking that Poliovirus should be GA for some time. I glad you don't mind my nominating it. I didn't know about the Featured Topic, I'll pop in and say hello. Thanks for the offer to help with PV; it's not far off FA imo. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Intro to DNA

I'm dubious, since it seems dangerously redundant with introduction to genetics. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Some are struggling and some are procrastinating with the topic selections. Should you see any of them that select a topic of personal interest, feel free to share your insights. I've added a section regarding mentors on the project page. Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2008. My original thoughts were: if they selected topics that were relatively low profile; they might not fall into shark infested waters! Either way, I've impressed upon them the need to find an experienced ally. Your prayers or assistance would be deeply appreciated. --JimmyButler (talk) 02:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've only just spotted this. You can see I'm already having discussions with one of yours below ;-) Graham Colm ^Talk 15:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Wilderness diarrhea

Thank you for your recent contribution and interest in Wilderness diarrhea. I sincerely appreciate your effort.

I was looking for a reference to support the assertion in your edit summary that "Enteroviruses do not cause diarrhea" and I found an article that seems to contain a counterexample. Here's a quote from the abstract [2]

"Enterovirus 71 (EV71) infection may be asymptomatic or may cause diarrhea, rashes, and hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD)."

Could you help clarify the situation? Thank you. --Bob K31416 (talk) 05:00, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

• OK, these are the viruses that cause diarrhoea; Norovirus, Rotavirus (Groups other than A in adults), Astrovirus, and two serotypes of Adenovirus ( types 40 and 41).

In contrast these are the non-enterpathogenic viruses found in faeces; Poliovirus, Coxsackievirus, Echovirus, Reovirus, Hepatitis A virus, Hepatitis E virus, Reovirus, Adenovirus (types 1-39) and Enterovirus.

Enterovirus has been detected in the stools of people with diarrhoea but, apart from a few anecdotal reports in the literature, (primary sources), their aetiological role has been proven. Given that these viruses replicate in the gut, in is not surprising that they turn up from time to time in folk with diarrhoea. Note that the abstract says "may cause diarrhea" - the paper reiterates this caution. In short, it would be non-verifiable to list enteroviruses in this article. There is very little proof that they a cause of diarrhoea and absolutlely no proof that they cause Travellers' or Wilderness diarrhoea.

Graham Colm ^Talk 11:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

FA thanks

		The Monarch of the Glen Appreciation
		Thanks for your assistance in helping Fauna of Scotland to become a Featured Article. It's much appreciated by Cervus elaphus and myself, Ben MacDui 18:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

A Rotavirus vaccine guy

Mentioned here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Sandy, a big thank you :-) I've added this to my watched pages. I didn't know Paul had an entry. I met-up with him a couple of times; the last one was in Paris in 1989. (And you think you're getting old gal!) Kiss. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I wasn't there ... in 1989, I was in Spain. Or was it Italy. (I'd better go read the Alzheimer's article again.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I did what I could to get your started; some of the studies weren't in PubMed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Virus

I'll have a look in the morning, not enough time at moment 18:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

three very quick things for starters

• heading should be just "Discovery" (don't repeat article title)
• taxa above genus level (eg orders) should not be in italics.
• This might be smoother: The English plural of virus is viruses.

I'll read through properly tomorrow, as I said jimfbleak (talk) 19:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jim, Graham Colm ^Talk 19:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I read through in detail this morning and made some minor edits. Generally, I thought this was very readable, given the topic, well-written and interesting. My only overall concern was that there were too many short subsections for my taste. Specific points

• Lead not sure whether derivation of word is significant enough, but it reads OK, so suck it and see
• it would take 30,000 to 750,000 of them, side by side, to stretch to 1 centimetre (0.39 in). – not sure about this, a very vague number and a very precise conversion. I don’t think it adds to the lead.
• Some viruses are carried by blood-sucking insects. – animal viruses?
• When referring to words as words, sometimes you use italics, sometimes quotes - re-introduced the word "virus" – MOS says italics
• Discovery - formation of whole areas – just areas
• Origins - however is rarely necessary
• Size - possible the style mavens may pick up lack of conversions, although imho it’s crazy having inches here
• Genome - I don’t like lots of one paragraph sections. I’d dump them all except genetic change
• Table –lacked white space to left, my attempt to fix isn’t good, you need to get someone who actually knows what they are doing (from the technical help page?)
• Diseases – should Hepatitis and Varicella be capped? in general, I was a bit confused by capitalisation eg Cowpea Mosaic Virus is capped, but not its tobacco cousin?

I was impressed by this, The table needs sorting, and I think you need to review subsection and capitalisation, otherwise it looks good for FAC. jimfbleak (talk) 06:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

	<font=3> Thanks again for your contributions, support, and comments - Hillsgrove Covered Bridge made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

FAC/Odex

Thank you for commenting on the FAC. It would be greatly appreciated if you have the time to glance through the article one more time for spelling, grammar and punctuation errors; the more eyes the better in giving the article another throughout round of copyediting to address Tony1's concerns. Thanks in advance, Mailer Diablo 08:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've made a few changes, please check that I haven't introduced any factual errors. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot, will do. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 17:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

• Just one more section left and it's ready for Tony's review. (see nomination) I hope it won't take too long, perhaps tomorrow. - Mailer Diablo 16:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• I look forward to adding my support. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

• I appreciate your work on the article. Is it okay with you to continue working/providing feedback on it (I see if I can get any new assistance), occasionally even after the FAC? - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 03:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, of course. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Graham, no this isn't a copyediting request, I promise. :) You have previously raised concerns in your review on the state of copyediting in the article. After another round of copyediting by other editors, I would like to now invite you to take another look and see if has addressed your concerns, so that the FAC can actually move on. Additional/continued feedback on the article is also welcomed on the FAC if it can be improved further. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 13:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm busy writing at the moment, but I promise to take a look later. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Rosetta@home

Thanks for your offer to peer review Rosetta@home on the MCB Wikiproject talk page. I've submitted a peer review request under the Natural sciences and mathematics section at PR. Per Gary King's comments at MCB talk, in the immediate future I'll be adding 'publisher' attributes and values for all references I can find them for, and moving citations to be after their closest proceeding punctuation. Thank you again for your interest. Emw2012 (talk) 02:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Virus

Hi Bob, thanks for your help here. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome. I also added some remarks to the FAC that I hope are of some use. Thank you.—RJH (talk) 19:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Bob, for your edits and helpful comments, which I'll address first thing in the morning. It's getting close to bedtime in England; (well past mine to be honest) :-). Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you find a source for "The Yellow Fever virus vaccine, a live-attenuated strain called 17D, is arguably the safest and most effective vaccine ever generated." Colin°^Talk 13:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Colin, I'll look, if not the sentence will have to go. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

PMID 18564013 says "The 17D live yellow fever vaccine has been widely acknowledged as one of the most effective and safe vaccines in use." which isn't quite as strong, and then spoils it with "Recently, however, reports of severe and previously unrecognized significant adverse events linked to the 17D vaccine..." (I've only read the abstract). Colin°^Talk 13:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I was looking in my books, (to no avail), should we dump the sentence? Graham Colm ^Talk 13:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

A google search turns up this source from 1998 but it is biased. It sounds like you can safely say it is "one of the most". However, I tripped up when first reading that sentence because you are giving an example of what has previously been described as a less-safe vaccine type. So perhaps there needs to be a "However" or some such alert. Colin°^Talk 14:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Graham; I got distracted by a phone call before I double checked my work. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Sandy, I think I have just changed a couple of refs back to the dark side. Sorry, I have had problems with formatting citations ever since my undergraduate days. Time for bed I think; it's been a long day. Best, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Virus

I realize that 'feacal' maybe be technically correct, but I don't see the reason for keeping that spelling when the actual article on the topic is spelled 'fecal.'Kniesten (talk) 16:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I have replied on the Talk page. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Raptor Red

It looks good to me, but I'm horrible at proper writing either way... good luck on the virus FAC, I would never have the patience or skill to attempt such a big article :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 21:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Does this mean yes, you want to help with a CE or you think you article is OK. (confused) ;( Graham Colm ^Talk 22:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

any and all help is appreciated (I asked an editor a while back about some help, but he's semi-retired on the project now and busy in real life.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 22:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll take another look at the article in the morning. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Nouns

It was my impression that unless you are using a taxonomical names, ie Orthomyxoviridae all common nouns are lower case. I did some hunting and found that the journal of General Virology recommends this article in its instructions for authors. It looks like that unless you are using the species name in italics it should be in lower case. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

• Good old SGM. OK so, what do we do? Go for species names in italics or lower case? I would prefer species names in italics. But we need to be consistent; (I'm not going to lose any sleep over this Tim :-) ). Graham Colm ^Talk 21:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd go for lc for normal text unless you are discussing taxonomy, then accepted species names in uc litalics. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Virus FAC

I have been away from Wikipedia for a few days. I withdrew my opposition since the emphasis of the Disease section has been more clearly underlined. The rest of my concerns are more peripheral to the candidacy of this particular article. These concerns should not subtract from the consensus that this is a FA-quality article. Good job with the article and thank you for your efforts in building a consensus. --Oldak Quill 00:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Phagocyte Article

Greetings GrahamColm, I am in the same prediciment as Eulemur. I am also very new to Wikipedia and I would appreciate it enormously if you could help me out. I look forward to working with you. Also, I would also appreciate it if you woulnt mind adopting me. I already am by one person (TimVickers). I do not know if it is possible to be by two people, but I use all the help I could get. Thank You. Dorkstar17 (talk) 00:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello GrahamColm, I am a tenth grader taking AP Biology who has been assigned the task of promoting a wikipedia stub (or I can generate a completely new article) to Good Article status or Featured Article status (this project is not due until next year so i have a lot of time to work on it). Right now, I am thinking of doing an article on phagocytes, but I am open to any interesting idea. I would very much appreciate your guidance or advice on this topic or others. Thank you for you time. Eulemur2008 (talk) 20:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Eulemur, I am an old Doctor of Science, but you can call me Graham. ;-) I know about your project because I watch Dr. Vickers' page. I have looked at Phagocyte and it needs a lot of help! The role of this cell is central to the immune response. I know something about this subject and I would be pleased to adopt you should you wish to take on this BIG subject. Please let me know your thoughts on this and tell me what you know about antigen presentation. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Again, Thank you for your prompt reply; I am very grateful. I am ready to tackle the subject of phagocytes. I am sorry to say that my knowledge of antigen presentation is limited (I just recently gained an interest in the topic). However, I do know that the macrophages and dendritic cells enable the T cells to recognize foreign matter. Eulemur2008 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, that's right ;-) and you'll know a lot more this time next year. I'll watch Phagocytes and I'll be here when you need me. Please be mindful of the time difference between Carolina and England. If I seem slow to respond it is probably because I am asleep. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Ironic, that after dancing the jig on the Introduction to Evolution FA attempt, that I would drag these sweet innocents into the fiery pit! But with you as a guardian angel; at least this one is safe! Thanks for the offer of assistance. If anything of concern arises (highly unlikely with this one) feel free to contact me via wiki email. Again... Thank You.--JimmyButler (talk) 00:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I forgot to tell you that I am going to edit the phagocyte article in a sandbox located on my user page until I get the article somewhat completed. I have not added anything new because right now I am still collecting data and resources. Thank you for adding the picture of the mouse macrophage to the article. Eulemur2008 (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for letting me know, I'll watch the page. Let me know if you get stuck. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the picture (it looks great). I hope the virus article makes FA. Eulemur2008 (talk) 19:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

• You are welcome and re: the virus article FAC—so do I. ;-) Graham Colm ^Talk 19:36, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on the Virus article. Eulemur2008 (talk) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks, It was hard work, but fun. I don't think phagocyte will need to be quite as long as virus, but I suggest you read the comments in the archived FAC where you can see how critical reviews are nothing personal; but are often very helpful indeed. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tropical Storm Erick (2007)

Thanks for the comments. I addressed the issues, hopefully to your satisfaction. Cheers. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Julian, I have replied on the FAC page. I hate doing this, but the article is way below par for an FA, and I think you know this. Please don't take this as personal criticism. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Diff. Tim Vickers (talk) 03:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

• What a great way to start the day! Well it took a year and and two peripheral FA virus articles, but we got there. Thanks for you help Tim, and constant watching. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 05:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
  • You're up early. Congratulations. Colin°^Talk 12:47, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks guys, (I'm always up early, I work for the NHS :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, Graham; I'm very pleased! Tony (talk) 14:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I contributed very little, but thanks anyway. Well done, you've worked hard for this one - and you're up even earlier than me! jimfbleak (talk) 16:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Image

Hi there, looks like a good image, but there is a problem with the release. People can't just release images to "Wikipedia" they have to be under a free license so they can be reused. However, since the copyright on this photo has expired (see this flowchart) I uploaded it to commons as a public domain image. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you help an old bridge to get featured?

Hi Graham. I have greatly expanded the article on the first working railway suspension bridge, the Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge and plan to nominate it for Featured Article status. It is undergoing a peer review (Wikipedia:Peer review/Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge/archive1‎) at the moment, and has been generally approved for content and layout. Reviewers have pointed out that the article could do with another editor to go over and copyedit, correcting grammatical mistakes and improving the language. Would you be interested to help with this? Sincerely, Jappalang (talk) 01:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jappalang, I spent about an hour looking through the article earlier this evening. I made a few edits, but on the whole I think it is well-written and engaging. I was impressed with the comprehensiveness, citations and interesting history. The article is close to FA I think. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments and edits! Jappalang (talk) 22:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Tropical Storm Erick (2007)

Thanks. :-) I could understand why it is hard to support such a minor article, or to even not oppose. I appreciate you taking the time to reconsider your opposition. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for "fresh eyes"

Graham, I wonder if you have time to take a look at Farthest South which is on FAC at the moment? User:Tony1 has suggested that the text be looked at by "fresh eyes", since it's a while since its peer review, and it has changed somewhat since then. I'd much appreciate a dose of your skilful nit-picking which has enhanced my contributions in the past. If you can spare a few moments. Brianboulton (talk) 09:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

• Brian, I will take a look this evening, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Butting in here. I have this page watched, and I saw this thread, so I copyedited the article a tad. Hope it helped a little bit. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Timeouts

I'm getting them too - it's a general problem at the moment. No matter, I'll be patient, it'll be worth the wait. Brianboulton (talk) 18:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

(PS) I've re-tweaked a couple of your edits, no offence intended! Brianboulton (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Brian, please revert anything you don't approve of; we have different writing styles. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk

WP:RUSSIA roll call and your input required

Privet. You are receiving this message as you were listed on the membership list of WP:RUSSIA at Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members. Recent times has seen minimal activity within WikiProject Russia, and there is an attempt to re-invigorate the project and have it become more organised into a fully-fledge functioning project, with the aim of increasing the quality of Russia-related articles across English wikipedia.

As we don't know which listed members are active within the project and Russia-related article, all listed members are receiving this message, and are requested to re-affirm their active status on Russia-related article by re-adding their username to Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia/Members by adding:

# {{User|YOURUSERNAME}}

to the membership list. You may also like to place {{User Russian Project}} on your userpage, as this will also place you in Category:WikiProject Russia members.

There is also an active proposal on the creation of a single WP:RUSSIA project. The proposal can be viewed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Russia#Proposal_for_overhaul_and_creation_of_a_single_WP:RUSSIA_project, and your comments and suggestions are welcomed and encouraged at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia/Proposal.

We all look forward to your continued support of WP:RUSSIA and any comments you may have on the proposal. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 04:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words

I thank you for encouraging me in regards to Quark. I plan to read over the article sentence for sentence tonight, examining the phrasing, and seeing whether I can simplify things. Best, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Coypedit request

Hey, since you've been so helpful in the past with copyediting, if you've got time could you take a look at StarCraft: Ghost? I think it's pretty good right now, but maybe I missed a few things. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gary, I will take a look later. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyedit. I think I've taken care of most of those issues now. Gary King (talk) 00:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Are you able to look at an FAC?

Hi, Graham. Can you take a look at Harvey Milk? It hasn't received a lot of responses on the FAC page. I appreciate what you can do. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 14:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Moni, I'll read the article now and say something at it's FAC later. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Harvey

Thanks Graham, I appreciate your copyedit at Harvey Milk. I really need to get up to speed on phrases that sound odd to non-Americans, but in the meantime, I'm happy to rely on your ear. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team help requested

Hi Graham, I notice you are mentoring one of the students at WikiProject AP Biology 2008. The FA-Team has just launched a mission to help this project, and also WikiProject North of the Rio Grande, improve articles towards featured quality. As an FA-Team member, I'm hoping you will want to support a couple more articles. Please add your name to the articles you are watchlisting on the mission page. Thanks, Geometry guy 19:31, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi GG, I have been watching Phagocyte for many weeks. I shall add my name to any others later. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Graham! Geometry guy 20:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hat in hand

Hey, Graham, I'm looking for someone who has time to do some prose tweaking at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bob Windle. Any chance you could give it a glance ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Good morning Sandy, yes, I will look at the article this evening when I return home from the lab. All the best. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 06:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Graham; I stumbled a bit over the swimming talk, so I wanted fresh eyes to work through it. I really appreciate it! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Graham; are you all set there? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sandy, yes I am. It's quite well written and I didn't spot much. If I have time, (big "if") I might comment at FAC, but don't wait for me. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

That's OK, if you're done, that's good. Sometimes I just need a second opinion. Thank you, Graham !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Tree: Peer Review

You had previously commented at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tree: A Life Story/archive1. I'm re-visiting it now after about a month to hopefully see it anew. I have opened Wikipedia:Peer review/Tree: A Life Story/archive1 and would like a little guidance on how to improve it to FA standard. Thanks. maclean 04:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Anaconda

Hello, I am in the same predicament as the Emeuler guy. He's a friend at my school. I want going to try and bother you and ask you to adopt my because I see you already have one, but I would love it if you would just check over my project on Anaconda. It is not that long and I am not really that great at looking over it in terms of making it look all official. My goal is to go for G.A. Status in the end. Right now it is submitted under peer review and I have a section that I need some help with on the page. Well even if I don't hear from you, Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you.

Dorkstar17 (talk) 04:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Graham, I have noticed that you have taken the time to review my article. I appreciate the consideration and time you took on it. I noticed you changed something also on it, I noticed that you edited something and I appreciate that as well. I will attempt to keep you updated on the article and look forward to working with you. Have a nice day.

Thanks, Dorkstar17 (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for not replying earlier, Anaconda is still on my list of things to do. I shall be taking a good look at the article as soon as I find the time. Graham, Graham Colm ^Talk 14:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Some SEM virus images you may be interested in

I just uploaded two images that are detail versions of the main HIV image which you may find useful in some of your work. They are not false color versions, but the second one (Image:HIV-budding-BW-detail(2).jpg) has a scale indicator on it. Keep up the great work on the virus articles. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for these. The scale indicator is particularly helpful. I will try to find a suitable home for this one. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 11:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Gastritis

Hello. I saw your comment on my Wikipedia page, and I wanted to thank you for it. I wasn't quite sure if it would pass as a cause or not. But could I ask for a few possible references I could use on other causes of gastritis? That's the only thing I'm having a lot of trouble on. If you could help me out, that would be wonderful.

Plus, I would appreciate it if you were my mentor (I'm assuming you know I am in the same class as Dorkstar and Eulemur.)--Llamoedu (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• I have left a big reply on your Talk Page, and yes I know about your class ;) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the references I'll be sure to check them out.--Llamoedu (talk) 02:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

		The RfA Barnstar
		Graham Beards, I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with 112 supports, 4 opposes and 5 neutrals. A special mention goes out to Stwalkerster and Pedro for nominating me, thanks a lot for having trust in me! In response to the neutrals, I will try to double check articles that have been tagged for speedy deletion before I CSD them and will start off slowly with the drama boards of ANI and AN to ensure that I get used to them. In response to the oppose !votes on my RfA, I will check that any images I use meet the non-free content criteria and will attempt to handle any disputes or queries as well as I can. If you need my help at all, feel free to simply ask at my talk page and I'll see if I can help. Once again, thank you for your participation, and have a great day! :) The Helpful One 22:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

design by neurolysis | to add this barnstar to your awards page, simply copy and paste {{subst:User:Neurolysis/THOBS}} and remove this bottom text | if you don't like thankspam, please accept my sincere apologies

Phagocyte

I have made some changes to the article both on wikipedia and in my sandbox. Sorry for the long wait. Eulemur2008 (talk) 20:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for formatting the article some more. I still intend to add more to dendritic cells and evasion by pathogens. I also deleted the picture of the mouse macrophage that used to be there (I am hoping to get it back) Eulemur2008 (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• The article is coming along very well indeed. I don't think we need the picture of the mouse macrophage anymore. You have done an excellent job on the references; but more are needed (a featured science article usually has around 100) but don't worry too much about this for now. Often citations are the last to perfect. Right now we need to concentrate on clarity of prose and comprehensiveness of content. Yes, "Dendritic cells" needs more, as does the "evasion" section—it might be useful to do a search on catalase-producing bacteria. Well done. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I have found some information on the discovery of phagocytosis. While researching I began to wonder if giving a history of some of the other sections (the types of phagocytes) is necessary. Eulemur2008 (talk) 19:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

• I saw you add those excellent sources to the Talk page. Don't worry too much at this stage about the history of the discovery of other types. This will be easy to add later, we can just use a few sentences saying this person later discovered this and this person discovered that. The important bit is the original discovery. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for formatting the "History" section. I was wondering if Paul Ehrlich should be included under the section because he did theorize that there were antibodies. Paul Ehrlich has more of an indirect involvement in the history of phagocytes. Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, I think we should leave Paul Ehrlich and his magic bullets out of the article for the time being—as you correctly point out, his involvement was not direct. There will be plenty of time to reconsider this later. By the way, your article is coming on in leaps and bounds, (as we say in England), well done. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:23, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Over the Edge (1999)/archive2

Is it possible for you to review Over the Edge (1999), and leave comments on its peer review? Thanks you.--TRU_CO 16:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

• I know nothing about the subject, but I shall take a look. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Virophage

Graham, while I was looking through some stubs I happened upon the virophage stub. I was wondering if this article should be combined or even just included in the main virus article. You may want to talk to Tim Vickers because I noticed that he has been working on the virophage article. Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Louis Brandeis

Please, look at the article Louis Brandeis, the one you reverted to consists of about 10 copies of the original. This vandalism keeps getting protected because reverting it shrinks the page size by 90%. I know removing large sections of material looks like vandalism, but it is legit in this case. Cluebots webpage for reporting doesn't work alas. --82.170.225.52 (talk) 12:30, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, I see what you mean, sorry for that. I've reverted to what looks like the last unvandalised version. I will keep the article on my watchlist for a while. Thanks for letting me know. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Acid dissociation constant - re-written lead

I have now re-written the lead for acid dissociation constant. The essential content of the lead is the same as before. The effect of this change will be that when chemists will read the explanatory material they will say to themselves, yes, I know that, but non-chemists will hopefully get the gist of what the article is about

I invite you to read it and then record your “vote”, e.g. “now support” or “still oppose”, at wp:Featured_article_candidates/Acid_dissociation_constant. I have assembled a list of names under Re-written lead, so that the responses will be collected together in one place.

Some minor disagreements will inevitably remain. These should not be a reason for opposition. Rather, put constructive ideas on the article’s talk page, so that the article can be further improved by the normal editing process. Petergans (talk) 09:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Itub (talk) has proposed an alternative, shorter version of the lead at User:Itub/ADC lead. Petergans (talk) 10:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Rotavirus Brazil vaccine

18567534 PubMed

Note to myself Graham Colm ^Talk 16:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your careful consideration at my successful RfA. "he has my full support" was generous and appreciated. Please let me know on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Serial comma

Mr. Colm,

Thank you for pointing out what you thought was a mistake. I'm glad there are dedicated editors on Wikipedia. I need to remind you, however, that serial commas (according to Wikipedia itself) "[precede] the last item in a list of three or more items."

In Harvey Milk, I removed a comma after a single item (in this case, a single predicate), not a list of items or predicates. It is not a serial comma, and serial commas actually have nothing to do with this sentence. The sentence is as follows: "He wrote for the college newspaper, and earned a reputation as a gregarious, friendly student."

You will note that this sentence has a single subject and a compound predicate. Since it is not a compound sentence, the comma after "newspaper" is grammatically incorrect. --24.98.76.198 (talk) 16:18, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I wrote the sentence without the splice. Another editor came along and added a fair point, that there is no way to know that absolutely no one suspected Milk was gay. It may be necessary to restructure the sentence to accommodate this issue. --Moni3 (talk) 16:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Phagocyte

Besides grammar and "wikilinking" what else in my article (content) needs to be done to put my article up for GA review. I am sure the new section I added will have to be heavily revised, though. By the way, thanks for promoting my article to B-class. Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

• I have been having trouble finding sources for intracellular killing (especially the oxygen-dependent methods). Do you have any idea of where to look for these references? It has been a great pleasure working with and you have been an enormous help. Eulemur2008 (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Edits

You are most welcome to help improve this article! Please do not apologise. --Dweller (talk) 17:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

No great mystery - I wrote it a long time ago (check its history) and it's out of date. Hence references to recent FAs that aren't recent, etc! I just removed an anachronistic reference to WP:AID, for example. --Dweller (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Quid pro quo

I did not mean that comment about a double standard against your. I made a private comment to my page of the double standard.

Recently, because I do not use email, I asked an editor openly on his talkpage if he wanted me to watch an article (he had written and I had contributed the second highest number of edits) as it was on the main page while he was running for RFA. The article was receiving a lot of vandalizm. Sandy used my innocent post to try to sabotage that editor's RFA. See: [3], [4], [5]RFA - Wehwalt

Do you think that was a fair thing for Sandy to do in an attempt to harm me and Wehwalt? (But, you probably feel I am in the wrong and Sandy (like Cas) is automatically in the right.) I do not like this duplicitous standard of behavior. (Do you know that I have edited the Major depressive disorder more than Cas has? —Mattisse (Talk) 21:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Mattisse, we have had a good relationship on Wikipedia, and I respect your contributions, but I do not understand any of this. Mattisse, I am worried about you—are you OK? You seem very stressed. Please, my friend, there is more to life. Feel free to email me. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not. When someone characterizes an open post on at talk page, asking an editor how I can best help him when his FA is on the main page being vandalized while he is running for RFA, and an editor votes against his RFA based on that open question of mine to him, saying in a long justification that it is an example of the corrupt behavior I and the other editor engage in, then no, I am not alright. To hurt me is one thing, and I expect that from that editor, but to hurt another editor to get at me is another. Fortunately, his RFA passed anyway.

I was kidding about the quid pro quo when it can to you, because it was on the exact same level as the post I made in support to the other editor. (I should have known the FAC crowd would take it as a fatal attack on one of their own.) I don't use email because I long ago learned I don't want to get the massive number of negative emails I was getting about other people from the FAC crowd. I am sure you have now received plenty about me. I am sorry that my talk page is stalked as it is. If everyone hates me so, why do they not leave me alone and stop watching everything I do. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 04:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Khrushchev Kennedy 1962 Wien.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Khrushchev Kennedy 1962 Wien.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:27, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

• It is not orphaned, it is used in the article about President Kennedy and a fair use rational is given. Sorry, it was used in the article. So it will have to go. Thanks for letting me know. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Advice

Hello I am studying biology at the moment and I was contemplating since you're such an expert in the field I could ask for some help? I need to know - this may sound silly but I can't find it here on wikipedia - what a virus cell actually does when it invades to the host cells DNA? サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 _Talk ^Contribs 00:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you read Introduction to viruses. Generally speaking, only one type of virus "invades" the host cell's DNA, these are Retroviruses. These viruses add their DNA to the host cell's DNA and when the cell uses this DNA along with it's own it is "tricked into" making offspring viruses. Most viruses only invade the cell; some stay in the cytoplasm but other reach the nucleus. All cells have the ability to make proteins and DNA, indeed they must do this to survive and reproduce. Viruses are made of protein and DNA and they hi-jack the cell and use the cell's protein and DNA making abilities to copy themselves many thousands of times. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Post Script. I would be very interested to know which parts of Introduction to viruses you find hard to understand, because this will be my fault not yours. Best wishes. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 01:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Graham. What I find find most difficult to understand is what a virus actually does to a cells DNA - does it destroy it? That, in general, I mean applies to all virsuses? In the article you pointed out the introduction does not in the least say what the relationship is between DNA and invading cell? What is the fate of most DNA in that cell after lysis? サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 _Talk ^Contribs 01:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

You have asked an interesting question but the answers are complex.

1. First of all you need to understand a little about apoptosis or programmed cell death (cell suicide). When a cell's DNA is damaged and if the cell cannot repair it, often a complex sequence of intra-cellular events are initiated by the cell that leads to it's death (apoptosis). One of the results of apoptosis is destruction of the damaged DNA by the cell itself. Some viruses have mechanisms to limit apoptosis so that the host cell does not die before progeny viruses have been produced. HIV for expmple, does this.,
2. In infections of animals that result in lysis, the released DNA is metabolised, (broken down) in the body.
3. Bacteriophages are found wherever there are bacteria. Bacteria infected by theses viruses burst and their DNA is released into the environment. Most bacteria produce enzymes that destroy DNA (and RNA)—these are called restriction enzymes. So, the answer to you question in the case of bacteriophages is other bacteria destroy the released DNA, not the bacteriophages.

Thanks again Graham. By the way do you remember me? サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 _Talk ^Contribs 01:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but your strange signature confused me. We have a shared interest in the life and work of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 10:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hooray! I'm glad you haven't forgotten. Anyway my signature changed because I've "evolved". I mean just compare me with a couple of months ago. Anyway thanks on helping me with biology, you've cleared things up. See you around some time. サラは、私を、私の青覚えている。 _Talk ^Contribs 14:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

To Graham

File:Cayos Dos Mosquises, Los Roques, Venezuela.PNG	Dependable as the tv.			Wise as an owl.		Warm as a fireplace on a snowy winter day.
Thank you, Graham. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

• Oh thank you! I have been feeling miserable all day—but not any more. This is so kind of you Sandy. Again, I'm lost for words. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

• Malleus got it right: "Least said, soonest mended." But your character is as appreciated as your work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, Ball's in yer court....

OK, I have set up Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GrahamColm and once you have answered the questions and accepted, the RfA can be transcluded. You must have a stack of pages on your watchlist, so I'd imagine this would give you a novel set to watch (differing from the Recent change patrollers). Anyway, have at it (can't find the template anywhere..) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

...oh yeah, here it is. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Graham, Aude transcluded your RFA before I got to finish. Are you aware? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Graham, I removed it; darn. Hate to see an RfA start off with a snafu. I'll set aside my other priorities and work on it now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

All right, Aude is saying that because you already accepted, it has to go live now. I (unhappily) dashed off a quick co-nom statement, and will re-transclude now. (I had hoped for time to write a more thoughtful co-nom, but you'll do fine anyway.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Whoo! Good luck, Graham—and, by the way, I strongly suggest you go over the Administrators' reading list before you have access to the tools. I started my "studies" a few days before my nomination went live, and they were tremendously helpful in answering questions and still guide my admin actions to this day (even though I haven't been very active lately :). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh my, all this has happened while is watching Martin Scorsese's film about the Rolling Stones.Thanks for your help and advice everyone. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Best of luck BTW, we've bumped into each other on the FAC's for Michael Jackson and Thriller (album). I was always impressed with your conduct and help during those processes and hope your get the mop. — Realist² 23:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Rotavirus

What software did you use to create this image? File:Rotavirus replication.png LOTRrules User talk:LOTRrules 20:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Microsoft PowerPoint, simple. :) Graham Colm ^Talk 19:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

And now, for Fvasconcellos' traditional nonsectarian holiday greeting!

Wherever you are, and whether you're celebrating something or not, there is always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! So, may you have a great day, and may all your wishes be fulfilled in 2009! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is this a combination of my Christmas greeting from 2006 and my New Year's greeting from last year? Why, it most certainly is! Hey, if it ain't broke...

Arena Active Protection System

Hey, there was some changes made to the prose; either by Skinny87 or myself (to fix some things brought up by other editors). Could you take another look? Thank you. JonCatalán^(Talk) 18:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

!Smiles!

DocDeel516 ^discuss has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Good luck with your RFA!--DocDeel516 ^discuss 20:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, made my day! Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Virus redirects

Hi Graham, I'm not at my best at the moment (cold) so can't work out exactly what you need done. Both these article names (Erythrovirus and Parvovirus B19) exist already. Do you want me to delete Erythrovirus, move the content of Parvovirus B19 to that name and then create a redirect to Erythrovirus from Parvovirus B19? Tim Vickers (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Tim, sorry to hear about your rhinovirus; we need to rename Parvovirus B19 to Erythrovirus. I think it's a move over redirect?? In other words, can you delete the current Erythrovirus and then rename the current Parvovirus B19 article Erythrovirus? If I had the admin tools I would delete Erythrovirus and then move Parvovirus B19 to Erythrovirus. Oooh.. my head is spinning. It's a sort of merge, I think. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I think the answer to your question is yes (good job I'm not an admin!). Graham

Done, sniffle, hope that is what, achoo! you wanted. Sniff. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, I hope your interferon does its job and then leaves you in peace and then your innate immunity gets you back to full speed. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've asked you to provide a reference for the name change at Talk:Erythrovirus#Move. Thanks. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 21:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Steven, yes I'll do that. It's getting late but I will find one from PubMed. Thanks. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Graham, I've replied on Talk:Parvovirus B19#Move, please review the new intro. It's a pleasure working with you, enjoy the holidays and see you around! And good luck with your RfA, seems to be going smoothly, you'll make a great admin I'm sure. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Steven, I saw the changes a few minutes ago and they all looked fine. I'll take a closer look at the article and it's sources later, just for peace of mind. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 11:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Axsym.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Axsym.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Pallid sturgeon

Thank you for reviewing the article I started.--MONGO 16:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

• You are welcome, congratulations. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: Vandalism

You seem to think that I vandalized the Rotavirus article. All I did was remove redundant citations.* I don't see how this counts as vandalism. 72.197.202.36 (talk) 19:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

• By "redundant citations," I mean that a particular fact had multiple citations on it, like this sentence. By removing redundant citations, that sentence would go to "... sentence."

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I appreciate it. The references you deleted are not redundant. Careful thought went into their inclusion. It would have been better to discuss this on the article's Talk Page before acting. You should at least have left an edit summary that described your actions and the reasons. If I had not seen you edits, other editors would have quickly reverted them. Thanks again for explaining you actions, but those valuable citations are best left in the article. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review 3 (Odexed)

Thanks for assisting in the improvement for the article Odex's actions against file-sharing, and please accept my apologies for the previous lack of response and edits due to dealing with real-life issues. I'm pleased to let you know that the third PR for the article is now up, and looking forward to hearing feedback from you so that it can be brought over to FAC soon. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 22:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

• Hi, of course I will take a look. Please do not hesitate to remind me if you see no response from me in the next few days. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

• I have worked on the Lead and hopefully made it shorter and clearer. Please revert anything you do not approve of. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks! Only one material fact is corrected, the lead reads very well. Please feel free to comment on the PR if you'd like to. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 14:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you're gonna have a shiny and mop soon - Congratulations! Anyway, Hildanknight had put in a lot of input on the Peer Review, but I'm (and he's) not sure if all the well-intentioned suggestions are actually grammatically correct. I need a third opinion and hope you'll be able to weigh in on which ones should be implemented. The priority is that the article has to remain grammatically correct.

I've tagged some of the obvious points with symbols as per how DYK works. Ticks are those that should be implemented, which crosses are not. Just tag the symbols on the remaining ones and if you're not sure, just leave the point alone, it's perfectly fine. Everyone in the PR agrees that the lead needs rewriting, so I'll be working on it before asking for opinions again. Hopefully once all these are done, I'll see if I can get Tony to clear the prose before sending it off for FAC. Seasons greetings! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 15:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

• The lead has been further shortened. If you don't mind, could you look it through once and see if it's grammatically correct. Please feel free to leave any specific feedback on the Peer Review if you'd like. Thank you once again, Mailer Diablo 15:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Best wishes for your RFA -- Tinu Cherian - 06:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 06:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

You passed Encephalon, the editor who was my early inspiration on Wiki :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Great going. If you ever want to know my "personal reasons", feel free to drop me a line sometime. My email is always open to you. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, at the moment, I'll just be glad when it's over :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

It's a horrible thing to go through, Graham, and you were brave to undertake it (we do need more bio/med admins). I hope that looking at where you fall at WP:100, and knowing how many editors hold you in high esteem, makes it all worthwhile. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations on your RfA passing! Here are some useful links for you:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list
• Wikipedia:New admin school

If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line and I (or another experienced admin) will be more than happy to help you out.

Congrats again! EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Graham! I'm sure you'll do just fine with the new tools. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

My thanks, to my nominators, supporters and opposers. I see a couple of new tabs have appeared above. Being an admin is certainly "no big deal", I just hope being one makes me a better contributor to this amazing project. Thanks again. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

• Have a happy new year and take care with these buttons :)) ! NVO (talk) 19:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! ₪Ceran →(cheer→chime →carol) 19:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Ha har, there, that wasn't so hard was it? (chuckle, rubs hands together with glee...) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hear, hear :) Seriously, don't forget the reading list—valuable information there. Use your new tools with care and, above all, common sense (as I'm sure you will :) and please don't hesitate to let me know if you need any help. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, for all your support and the offers of help. Believe it or not, I was reading the reading list when I got the "you have new messages" signal. :) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

• PS. It's been a very busy week for me here on Wikipedia. I am amazed at the support I got, which I still cannot hardly believe, especiallly given my esoteric interests and all my nit-picking of FACs. The opposes were very important to me; they taught me more than I think the writers intended and I am sincerely grateful to all of them for their honesty. Now I feel I am at the very bottom of another Wikipedia learning curve, almost the new boy again. I have to reflect on this and I'm going to take a Wikibreak of just a few hours. I'll be back in the morning. Pinch me someone—is this a dream? Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
  • An excellent attitude to have; I occassionally review my RfBs to see if there's any additional insights I can garner from the opposes, and also to make sure I stay grounded. If you need some advice with the sysop tools, just drop me a line. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Congratulations - you'll do great with the tools. Let me know if I can help with anything. Best wishes. MastCell ^Talk 20:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Congratulations, Graham. Colin°^Talk 22:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Graham. Congradulations for becoming an admin. I'm glad I have worked with you in the past. I am hoping we will work together in the future and finally be able to get ODITLOID to FA one day in the future. I want to hear your thoughts on this. LOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 00:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Well done mate. When the editor responsible for most of the very few med/sci pages I've ever wholeheartedly recommended to my nursing students at work finally stepped up for the squeegee, I have to wave the compressed-cardboard NHS bedpan in victory. Plutonium27 (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFA and Best wishes again -- Tinu Cherian - 05:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

There is no need for thanks, Graham; it was a pleasure. Congratulations and Happy New Year. All the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

The most useful thing I found early on was the ability to semi-protect some pages which cop frequent vandalism, especially large ones and BLPs. Sneaky people removing paragraphs from FAs and stuff (groan). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Acid dissociation constant

If you could weigh in on Petergans recent behavior with the article that would be great. If you look at the history and the talk page, you should be able to get a good idea of what has gone on.--Jorfer (talk) 18:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

OK JEF, I have taken a quick look. I will have time tomorrow afternoon (GMT) to give a fuller response. (I'm working at my hospital in the morning). In the meantime, I recommend stepping back from the debate, and that you try not to take any comments personally. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:58, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Your Majesty, Sire

Your Majesty, what is it like being an Administrator? I bow down to you, sire, us peasents often want to know what it is like belonging to the upper classes. I bid thee farewell... for nowLOTRrules _Talk ^Contribs 23:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear GrahamColm, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Day, and that 2009 brings further success and happiness! ~ YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again Graham for all off your hard work at FAC. Here is some fuel from my tree to keep you firing in the new year! YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Well done on the RFA as well. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Anaconda

Anaconda is no longer being actively edited by students involved in the Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2008. This student has opted out of the program for second semester. Hopefully, they did no damage during their brief experience with Wikipedia - the article were stubs and in poor condition on their arrival; however, I will look it over. My apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused. I had some initial doubts about the level of commitment among my students; however, the second semester should consist of a more focused group much reduced in numbers. Academic natural selection of sorts. Again - thank you for your support in this project -hopefully it will not discourage your enthusiasm for future projects of this nature. --JimmyButler (talk) 03:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)--JimmyButler (talk) 03:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

• There has been no damage at all; your student just had some bad luck picking a species but choosing an article about a genus. I didn't spot this, I confess. But your student has helped to improve Wikipedia, and this is why we are all here. Please pass on our thanks to the young Wikipedian for their contribution to the project. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:08, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hodgkin's lymphoma

Hey Graham,

Protection probably isn't needed now, the conversation I've had with the user at his talk page and mine shows that he probably won't be adding the information again as he understands why it can't be added. Cheers,

—Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 21:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look at the talk pages and reconsider protection. Thanks again. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll leave the protection in place, I've only set it for one day. I have written myself a note to remove the notice tomorrow. Thanks again. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hello. A while back you read and peer reviewed the article Homosexual transsexual. You pointed out a problem with the link in one of the references. That has been corrected. Could you please take another look. --Hfarmer (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection enquiry

Infectious mononucleosis is seeing a fair bit of vandalism today, and looking at the history it seems like an ongoing thing since it's been going on all through December and before. Do you think this is a candidate for permanent semi-protection? Cheers, —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 22:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep the page on my Watchlist for now, the last IP edit was useful. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that one, and I've welcomed that user. But the majority of previous IP edits are vandalistic (is that even a word?). Cheers, —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 23:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they were, but they seem to have moved on, (probably to cause trouble elsewhere :-), I'll keep watching, Epstein-Barr virus has been on my list for a long time, but I have neglected this one it seems. PS. Well done for welcoming the IP, I always forget to do this. PPS, don't worry about spelling, this is my talk page—not a FAC, all typos, neoligisms, fused-participles, and bad spelling are welcome—as long as the meaning is clear.  :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Haha, fair enough. Thanks for looking into it anyway. I forgot your specialty so-to-speak are viruses. Would you by any chance be interested in helping me and a few others get a featured topic on Poliomyelitis/Poliovirus? We've got a load of articles to include and several are already GA/FAC, so it'd be good to have someone with a primary interest involved. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 00:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I nominated Poliovirus for GA, I seem to recall. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahh good, well I may have posted this before in the past but check out this link. It's a little dead at the moment but me and DO11.10 (talk · contribs) are trying to get it back together again by working on Post-polio syndrome. Your help would be appreciated :) —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 00:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Moral Support

Heh, thanks. It's my first time at FAC and as you say, I've only just discovered how stressful it can feel. I understand this nomination was probably a bit rushed, so I'll take that into account next time. Sunderland06 (talk) 23:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have to take a week off from work when I have a FAC running, and I keep plenty of Guiness in stock to calm me down. Bye the way, my dad was born on the north-east coast (South Shields) and was a life-long, armchair supporter of Sunderland. He moved to Birmingham, my home town, in his 20s. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa McMurray

Hey, sorry to bother you... I'm just wondering why you used {{Archivetop}} to close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa McMurray instead of the usual {{subst:at}}. Is there something special about the AfD that I'm missing? I haven't taken a close look over it, but I thought AfDs were supposed to be closed with {{subst:at}} tags. DARTH PANDA^duel 05:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte

I put phagocyte up for GA review. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 16:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

• Well done. I will not comment on the article for now because I do not want to influence the GA reviewer and I will want to work together with you on the FAC. I could do the GA review but this would not look good I think. I hope someone picks it soon and I will help you with any difficulties that may arise. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

• Well done! And I look forward to working with you. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I am confused on if mast cells should be included in the types of phagocytes (you included them under the history section, but you backed them up with a reference). This is the first time I have ever heard them mentioned as phagocytes. Even in the mast cell article it mentions nothing of phagocytosis and instead focuses on their ability to release bactericidal chemicals; however this could be due to a poorly written article. Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 21:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Eulemur,

Ernst, (the cited book), has this to say in a section called "Professional Phagocytes": "Mast cells can ingest particles through IgG, IgE or complement receptors (gives ref). In addition, interaction with the the glycosyl phosphatidyl inositol (GPI)-anchored protein CD48 on mast cells facilitates phagocytosis and killing of Escherichia coli (gives ref). Not much is known regarding the precise biological significance of phagocytosis by mast cells in vivo, because the major contribution of mast cells to the host defense against bacterial infection is through release of the proinflammatory cytokine tumour necrosis factor...(gives ref)" Phew!! The next heading is "Non-professional Phagocytes". So perhaps we should add "possibly" to qualify calling mast cells professionals? On another point, when is your deadline for getting this to FA? We need to seriously consider this now. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

PS. We should start using the article's Talk Page for these discussions, so everyone can find and read them. :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

• The deadline for FA is June 5 (or around there). FA is not required but I would like to get it for extra credit. Following this comment I will leave all questions on the talk page. Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Graham,

I listed three article numbers from pubmed that have to do with the ability of mast cells to partake in phagocytosis. I will try to add a mast cell section to cell types in the following days. I am considering changing the heading for cell types to professional phagocytes because there are non-professional phagocytes as well. Do you think it would be important to at least mention non-professional phagocytes? These comments are also going to be on the talk page. Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 21:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for being way ahead of me (you had already changed cell types to professional phagocytes). I did not notice this until I was going to change the heading. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, yes, I saw that. I have replied on the talk page. What are your thoughts on my diagram by the way? Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

• I do like the diagram. It is a good representation of phagocytosis in only three steps (this is a good thing if someone that is not well versed in the immune system happens across the article). I believe like you stated on the talk page with some more work this article could reach FA status. Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. How many non-professional phagocytes are there?

This is a bloody good question; I have just read that Chinese hamster ovary cells, under experimental conditions, can engulf Toxoplasma gondii parasites. I'll get back to you on this—in the meantime my answer is probably many. And yes, your article is close to FA. It needs a few more hours of work over the next few months. I would start with the Lead, see my comments on the Talk Page. Graham. :-) Graham Colm ^Talk 22:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello Graham,

I have expanded the introduction to two paragraphs. However it is still incomplete: I must add the third paragraph about bacterial evasion and resistance (I will try to finish this in the next few days). --Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Technical matter re: closing AfD's

Hi Graham - I saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa McMurray. As a minor technical point, it's probably best to use the {{Afd top}} and {{Afd bottom}} templates at the top and bottom of an AfD when closing it, rather than using standard archiving templates. The {{Afd top}} and {{Afd bottom}} templates are specific to AfD's and they generate some of the necessary standardized boilerplate. I think there's a short how-to here. I took the liberty of replacing the archive templates on the AfD in question, but just wanted to give you a heads-up. Happy editing. MastCell ^Talk 17:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops - I just noticed that User:Darth Panda raised the same issue one thread above me. Anyhow, it's not a big deal, but just wanted to give you a heads-up. Don't let it dissuade you from closing AfD's - we need clueful admins working in that area quite badly. Just a minor technical matter. Take care. MastCell ^Talk 17:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to tell me both of you. I've written this down in my special little book. Sorry about that. :-( Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem - you learn on the job. No harm done. I was lucky enough to receive gentle guidance when I was a new admin; hopefully you will be too. :) MastCell ^Talk 19:24, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Med expertise needed

Hey, Graham. I'm working on rewriting an article in a sandbox, and there is some medical information included in a section. I've done my best to write it well, but I think there may be some subtle distinctions in medical writing and I want to make sure I haven't misrepresented anything. Also, the information is centered in the US, and I don't know how different information is in the UK or Europe. I don't generally have access to European journals, but I may be able to get Lancet or BMJ. Neither do I understand how pregnancy, abortion, contraceptives, breast feeding, and miscarriages are protective factors for ovarian cancer... I was wondering if you could assist. Thanks for anything you can do. --Moni3 (talk) 18:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi Moni, of course I'll take a look, it's not really my field as you know—but from my first glance I have noticed that you have listed bacterial vaginosis as sexually transmitted, it is not :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, it has been described as "sexually occurring", but it is listed with other STDs. I don't know if the distinction is important enough to make. --Moni3 (talk) 18:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not considered to be an STD in the UK. It is an important distinction, BV can occur in celibate women. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Sindhu Bhairavi/archive1

Thanks for the peer review. I had exams due to which I was not able to check the status of articles as frequently as I used to. I have worked on your suggestions and would appreciate more help on the topic. I am new to the process of peer review. The conversation is now achieved. Please let me know there is a need for it to be unarchived to get more suggestions. Regards, Bharathprime (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the peer review is indeed archived and should be left as it is. I suggest you get another editor to copy-edit your article. You can use the article's Talk Page for further comments. I'll take another look at the article this weekend and give you some more pointers. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Bharathprime (talk) 20:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Birmingham_3

As you live in Brum, just thought I'd let you know that a meetup is being planned, be great if you were interested and joined the discussion. Anyway, are you enjoying adminship? Sticky Parkin 19:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep me posted on this, with a bit of luck it will be on one of the few days that I don't have to go to work or am on-call. With regard to Adminship, I'm still in the shallow end of the pool and wearing water wings. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I for one don't have as many commitments as you, :) as it's at the planning stage you can help get a date picked that will fit your schedule (if you have any idea what that may be, or can occasionally pick a shift in advance. Sticky Parkin 23:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I work all weekdays and most Saturdays up to 1.00 pm and one full Sunday a month. I haven't got the rota here, so I will have to check my free time when I am at my hospital on Monday. But, I am sure I can give you a few dates in February when I can meet-up on a Sat or Sun afternoon. Can I let you know on Monday night? Graham.

PS. I am pathologically shy, so please do not take this as a definite "yes" yet. :-) Graham Colm ^Talk 23:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

No probs, as you know we have a lot of very reserved young men here. Imagine how shy you perhaps were at about 20.:) There might be a fair few of those attending, so I'll probably be the most scary person there.:) Sticky Parkin 23:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This is oddly reassuring :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Sheng Long

I'm sorry, but can you be a bit more concise on what needs to be fixed with the prose? I understand that you're a busy fellow, but after two copyedits already a blind third is likely not to be satisfactory. I'd rather just get it fixed and out the door and move on to the next subject, as there's nowhere else I can go with it as it stands. So unless you say what's wrong with the prose and where, fixes are going to be difficult.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy's Interview

Hi

I don't suppose you have a link to the Radio 4 interview by any chance ? I could probably look I know, but I am in the middle of extensive edits to some pages due for demotion and deadline getting rather tight

thanks --Chaosdruid (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC) (UK)

Try [6], at about 1:18.50. I have just listened to it again. If you are outside the UK, please let me know if the link works—I'm interested. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I see you are in East Anglia, so forget the request :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Cheers very much for that speedy reply! I'm listening to it whilst editing woohoo ! --Chaosdruid (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Mast cell

I am becoming more convinced that mast cell should be added to professional phagocytes because both Ernst and Paoletti mention that they are professional and the four citations on the phagocyte talk page talk about their ability to participate in phagocytosis. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 14:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, go ahead. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Need some clarification on your CRS serological profile

Hi Graham,

I'm a medical writer working on an educational powerpoint presentation on TORCH diseases and would like to include a version of your graph. I'd really appreciate it if you could clarify a few things for me.

1. WRT to viremia and infectivity, I assume this refers to the gravid mother, is that correct? Since infectivity to the fetus is highest from early in the first timester, does the infectivity here refer to others the mother might be exposed to?

2. Where does maternal IgM lie on this graph? I know it's a compressed scale, but the IgG line seems like it really should be IgM (assuming first trimester exposure/infection)

3. Where did you garner this information from? Do you have references you can point me to?

4. Do you have any information on fetal blood, assuming infection early in the first trimester?

If you don't want to post to this page, you can respond in my talk page (RomaLevy) or email me directly: [email protected]

Thanks for your help!

RomaLevy (talk) 20:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Roma Levy

Hi Roma, the graph is based on one in a small book sent to me and published by Abbott Diagnostics, Europe. It's called "Congenital Diseases Learning Guide: CMV, Toxoplasma, Rubella". Unfortunately it does not have an ISBN number. The main difference is that in my version I have not included the child's IgG Avidity line but have shown maternal IgG instead; otherwise the graphs are similar.

It is the serological profile of the foetus/child. IgM does not cross the placenta, so there is no maternal IgM on the graph. The graph shows a generalised serological response. In some cases IgM can persist for up to a year.

Hope this helps. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Graham,

Thanks -- this helps quite a lot. I have that user guide somewhere, so I'll track it down and take a look at the original. I'm sure it lists references. After I posted to you I tracked down a few references on prenatal testing and noted that prenatal testing for fetal IgM really can't be accomplished before week 20 - 24, by which time there's little point if the maternal testing has been conducted appropriately.

I'm a little surprised that IgM doesn't cross the placenta. As I recall, EBV-harboring B-lymphocytes have been found to cross the placenta, so I would have thought the same would be true for IgM expressing lymphocytes. Maybe I'm getting my wires crossed here. ID is still a new field for me and the last time I took a formal virology class was in 1981.

Best regards,

Roma

I have been remiss...

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		To GrahamColm, for assisting in technical wording, resources, and general scientific authority for the physical health section of Lesbian. It used to be a battleground for undue weight and pointy edits, and is part of the reason I rewrote the entire article. Your assistance, as usual, is invaluable. Thank you. Moni3 (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Water fluoridation controversy in the UK

Thanks for the careful review and the kind words. It's not a big deal as far as the article goes, but your comment "(not in the UK where I live)" got me to to wonder: isn't water fluoridation controversial in the UK too? Griffin et al. 2007 (PMID ?) write "Dixon and Shackley’s finding of a majority of their UK sample being in favour of fluoridation seems at odds with the response of our UK focus groups." And Armfield 2007 (PMID 18067684) writes "There is a payoff for generating controversy in an increased audience. In 2001, the Dental Health Foundation in Ireland analysed recent print, radio and television articles relating to water fluoridation over a one-year period, finding the media coverage to be predominantly negative (52%) with only 14% of articles judged as being positive. A similar bias was found with press cuttings in the UK." My own impression is that fluoridation is far more controversial in the US than the UK, but that there's some controversy in the UK too. Eubulides (talk) 23:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I can't speak for Ireland, but most people in the UK seem to not know nor care. Check with Colin (I never read newspapers)—my impression is that it is a non-issue here and has been so since I was a boy. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

PS. There have been some reports of opposition, (e.g. in Isle of Mann), but I maintain that if you ask "Joe or Joan Bloggs" about fluoridation, they would not know what you are talking about. I live in the West Midlands and we have had fluoride in our water for donkey's years. OK, some people choose to drink bottled, spring water—but this is not because of worries over fluoride. It's a lifestyle choice, I occasionally buy it because I like the CO2. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree most folk in the UK don't know if their water is fluoridated. I didn't and had to look it up (no). Though I'm sure everyone knows about fluoride toothpaste. Looking in my paper's archive (Google for [site:www.guardian.co.uk water fluoridation]) turns up some reasonable reporting and explanation of the issues. I was interested in Ben Goldacre's comment. Despite some changes in legislation, I'm not aware that the extent of water fluoridation in the UK has changed recently. Perhaps that's why it isn't on the front page of the Daily Mail. Colin°^Talk 15:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, maybe it occurs naturally in your tap water? Birmingham water is quite soft. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

My water company says I get 0.187 mg/l fluoride. Not enough. Colin°^Talk 16:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Evolutionary Origins

Thank you for adding the section; I was, literally, going to add four minutes after you added. However, your reference was much better than mine. I do think that the ability between distinguishing self from nonself should be stressed more because it is a vital part of the immune system (it is only referred to loosely in the article). Now that "evolutionary origins" is out of the way, I can add "mast cell". Thank you for all of the help. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• This is a sentinel paper in my humble opinion. I am not 100% satisfied with the section because evolution is not really discussed—we might be questioned about this. Regarding self and non-self, remember that the article is primarily about phagocytes so don't feel obliged to summarise the whole subject of immunity and make use of wikilinks where possible (but don't over do it :-)). Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

About the self and non-self information. I meant that we should probably say in the section (I have a citation for this) that the ability of amoebas to distinguish between self and nonself is a pivotal ability also found in the immune system. I feel that the previous statement wraps the section up better (maybe). Also there is not much on the evolutionary pathways just similarities in behavior between macrophages and amoebas (this may need to be mentioned as well). On a different note I have written a mast cell section in my first sandbox. I would really appreciate it if you could review this (I feel like something is missing). If you decided to review the section do not worry about the references ; out of laziness I have not put them in yet and once I figure out how the section can be fixed I will add the references and put them into the phagocyte article. Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 14:11, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, say exactly that the ability of amoebas to distinguish between self and non-self is a pivotal one that is also found in the immune system and give the reference. I doubt if evolutionary pathways exist, remember our phagocytes contain all our DNA, they are part of us and not visitors—so only analogies can be made. I have tweaked the Mast Cells section on you sub-page. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I am very grateful for the copy-edit. I will put the mast cell section in phagocyte, and the above statement about amoebas, when I get done with some errands. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 14:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Errands—that's a beautiful old-fashioned word. In the UK it means the little jobs (usually shopping) that parents (mainly mother's) ask their children to do. In Ireland they say "messages". Does it mean the same thing in the US? Graham Colm ^Talk 14:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

In Scotland, "messages" are groceries and to "do the messages" means to go out shopping for them. Colin°^Talk 15:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• When I said errands I was referring to "the little jobs (usually shopping)". It is interesting that in Scotland and Ireland the word "messages" is used. I have only heard the word message used to apply to a transfer of information from one person to another. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

You are so helpful that a barnstar is in order. Sometimes (not all the time), people oppose FA or support AFD to be nasty, I suspect. This is not the case for you! You even went through the effort to create a map, which is not easy! Thank you. Chergles (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Awarded to GrahamColm for efforts in helping the New York State Route 382 featured article candidate. He made critical comments about the article and a map. Rather than limit his participation to those critical comments, he made the extra effort of creating an improved map. Chergles (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Osteochondritis dissecans

I'm somewhat optimistic. However, my own experience with FA was so brutal that I can't help but worry for them. They do have a strong support group to serve as a safety net; for that I am grateful. Many thanks for your willingness to support these guys! You would find it interesting (in a positive way) to hear the student's discussions regarding their various mentors. No pressure --- but like it or not --- your a role model! --JimmyButler (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Greetings from the MCB WikiProject!

Hello, Graham Beards, welcome to the Molecular and Cellular Biology WikiProject! I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Here are some ideas on how you can help:: Read our Manual of Style, guide to citing sources and try this citation tool Join in editing our collaboration of the month Have a look at some related projects and resources Improve articles on our worklist If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, don't hesitate to post on the project talk page, or please drop me a note on my talk page. Again, welcome! Tim Vickers (talk) 16:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Symposium: FAC and the sciences

• Your input is requested, either at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#FAC_symposium or at the subpage where the effort will begin... Thanks! Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 10:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3

	<font=3> Thanks again for your edits and support - Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3 made featured article today! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Defects of phagocyte cell function

What needs to be added to this section? It seems like there would be an endless list of things. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 00:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, nothing as far as I can see, as you say it could be very long, best to leave a little summary I think. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 07:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Does it have to be a section at all? It could be included in the sections where the defects take place. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 13:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not, give at try and see if it works. Graham.Graham Colm ^Talk 13:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte FA

I am ready to nominate phagocyte for FA. I truthfully do not know what other content could be added. I do know, however, that (like you said) it needs to be a little more "lay-friendly". I am excited about the new challenges FA will bring. I was going to put it up for peer review before FA, but you said that you know some editors capable of reviewing (there does not seem to be much need for actually posting it for a peer review now). I am aware of your many contributions to wikipedia and feel confident in your advice. Thank you. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 19:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• Put it up for peer-review, we might get some useful feedback. You can do this straight away if you have time. :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I put phagocyte up for peer review. Should I also post a comment on "the doctor's mess"? --Eulemur2008 (talk) 20:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Well done, I'll notify the medics if you want me to. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:25, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks. I am glad that someone responded to the request for review quickly. As for the proposed tolerance section, one of the references that I found for dendritic cells talked about their ability to participate in building tolerance. At the time I was not exactly sure what the signifance of it was (or exactly what everything meant because this was very early on in the project), but now I will be glad to add the section. :) --Eulemur2008 (talk) 01:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

• Immunological tolerance is done. Also Scray mentioned that the article focuses on bacteria; I am not quite sure how to fix this because the bacterial evasion section is important and so is intracellular killing. These two sections may be where he gets the impression of focusing on bacteria, but I do mention elsewhere in the article that phagocytes do phagocytose dead or dying cells. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for adding the apoptosis section. That fixes the problem of the article focusing more on bacteria. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 12:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• I have just shortened the Lead, which was too long, I hope you approve, if not we can discuss this.

• I approve for the most part, but the immunological tolerance section or evolution section were not mentioned. Does every section have to be mentioned in the lead? Thanks. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• I suggest one sentence on each—there is room now. Also, after "engulfed" we need to add "and usually destroyed" don't say killed becuase not all that is eaten is alive. :-) Graham Colm ^Talk 13:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• So true; one cannot kill what is not living. I will add the sentences to the introduction. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• You put a lot of effort into the article as well. For this I am extremely grateful. :) --Eulemur2008 (talk) 14:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Graham, I'd be happy to review this, but I'm not going to be quick. I didn't do biology at school and don't know the first thing about the immune system. I asked my wife what phagocytes were and she made a PacMan chomping motion with her hand. She knows how to pitch it to my level :-) My initial thought is that if I really want to understand what Phagocytes are about, I need to read some other WP articles first. Is it fair to expect the reader to have a little immunology understanding, or do you think someone should be able to come to the article cold and benefit from reading it? Do we have a WP hatnote to guide the reader on what to read first? What audience are we aiming at? It is a specialist subject, unlike perhaps virus that anyone might want to read about. Colin°^Talk 22:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Colin, you should listen to your wife more often perhaps; she is spot on :-) At least could you just review the lead, history and the small section on evolution at the bottom? I was not expecting a critique of the explanation of Tol-like receptors etc. This is starting to sound really patronising (good job you know me) but I so want the Lead and History to be lay-friendly. If you have to read other articles first before understanding these, as opposed to just checking the links, then we have failed in our mission :-( Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

PS. It's not like virus, somewhat more specialised I think. Graham.

FAC

Graham, it's hectic now, and a few mins a day at this silly ArbCom thing is all I can afford. 4 March and I'm free. Can you please send me a note then and I'll be pleased to help. Tony (talk) 15:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I fully understand and will knock on your door later. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Hepatitis_B_virus_1.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Hepatitis_B_virus_1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, source, (self) added now. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:49, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Hepatitis

Where's Waldo?

Hi,

Could you identify the elements in this electron micrograph, in this image's caption over at the Hepatitis B article? Is Hep B the circles or the cylinders? What are the other structures? Thanks! - Tempshill (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the round objects are the actual virus particles, once called Dane particles. The cylinders are the excess surface antigen, (HBsAg). The other structures are also probably HBsAg, but they may be host serum protein. Graham Colm ^Talk 07:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte peer review

I've left some comments on the peer review page, dealing with the first few sections. I'll add further comments on the remaining sections during the next few days. It's a tough one for me, non-scientist that I am, but good discipline. Brianboulton (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, Graham Colm ^Talk 06:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello Graham, I will try to get to all the concerns listed by Brianboulton over the weekend. If I get time I may work on the article tonight. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and a request

Thanks for signing up at Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers and for your work doing reviews. It is now just over a year since the last peer review was archived with no repsonse after 14 (or more) days, something we all can be proud of. There is a new Peer review user box to track the backlog (peer reviews at least 4 days old with no substantial response), which can be found here. To include it on your user or talk page, please add {{Wikipedia:Peer review/PRbox}} . Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Animal, pathogenic, foreign particles

Reversion is a very bad way of cooperating. It mostly creates adverse feelings. Your intention is to cooperate, isn't it? In this case you could have for example modified the use of or replaced the word animal, to clarify that these cells are part of the animal. But "pathogenic" and "foreign particles" are too exotic to use right at the start. "Eat" is not sufficiently close to the reality to be used here. You show that you know this, by placing it within quotations. --Ettrig (talk) 06:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Osteochondritis dissecans

I see you are fixing the reference/inline citation author names/formatting. Can I help, or would I just end up messing your work up? If I can fix them too, how should I change the formatting? Thanks for your support! Food_Puma 20:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, I'm just about done there. You can double check that I haven't made any mistakes. Best of luck with the FAC—it seems to be going very well. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

This edit - spelling of acyclovir

Hi Graham, I found this correction to be somewhat odd because the spelling "acyclovir" is just as correct as "aciclovir". My guess is that you might not be aware of the equivalence of these two spellings. This is of course a totally minor point in the context of your fantastic work on this and other articles (and did not revert it, of course) - but WP is a place for minor points, isn't it?  ;-) --Scray (talk) 00:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Its all Good!

My defensive and controlling nature as a teacher may be getting in the way! Relinquishing control goes against the very core of what I've done for 25 years. Keep the faith - I'll get better at this. Who knows, maybe I'll become as comfortable in this forum as my students!--JimmyButler (talk) 23:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

About File:Antigen_Presentation.png

Hi Graham, just noticed this figure, about which I have a few concerns. I hope that the friendly tone of this comes through - I mean no offense, simply trying to help. First, TAP is a transmembrane protein complex, so probably should not be floating in the cytoplasm. Second, MHC molecules are transmembrane molecules, so should not be depicted as floating across the ER. Also, the position and shape of the peptide relative to the MHC I molecule appears to change between its last position in the secretory pathway and its position on the cell surface. Cheers! --Scray (talk) 22:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Scray, there's never any offence taken, on the contrary! Here's the image so spies know what we are talking about:

Should I move the TAP to lie on the membrane of the ER? I am not sure where the problem lies with the MHC. The reason why the peptide changes position is because I am rubbish at drawing. Having said this, it is such a simplified diagram, does it matter that much? :-( ? Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Graham, this is what I had in mind:

It is still a simplification, but it's closer to the current models. What do you think? --Scray (talk) 01:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Good morning Scray, I think it's beautiful, and an SVG too! Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 08:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't know about your browser, but in mind the background of the SVGs looks gray rather than white (as with the PNG), but my impression is that SVG is the preferred format. Do you know whether that's correct? I can't remember where I saw it. Perhaps I should be specifying the background color when creating the SVG - it would be nice to get better contrast. --Scray (talk) 10:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, found a great resource --Scray (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Question about a sentence in the Rotavirus article

To start, thanks for a brilliant article on Rotavirus. We've been busying translating it for the Finnish wikipedia for about a month now. We're in the final stages (i.e. Replication) and I starting pondering the following sentence:

[Proteins in the third layer (VP7 and the VP4 spike) disrupt the membrane of the endosome, creating a difference in the calcium concentration.] 1) This causes the breakdown of VP7 trimers into single protein subunits, 2) leaving the VP2 and VP6 protein coats around the viral dsRNA, 3) forming a double-layered particle (DLP).

Does the bracketed sentence cause 1-3, or does 1 cause 2, which causes 3? Thanks for your help! -Yupik (talk) 20:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Yupik, Sorry for the confusion. 1 and 2 cause 3:

Proteins in the third layer (VP7 and the VP4 spike) disrupt the membrane of the endosome this causes a difference in the calcium concentration. This difference in calcium concentration then causes the breakdown of VP7 trimers (three units) into single protein (one unit) subunits. The VP2 and VP6 protein coats remain around the viral dsRNA to form the double-layered particle.

I hope this helps. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Beautiful, thanks! -Yupik (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Being Human

Thanks for the help on being human. cant wait for the new season talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC).

Nor can I! It gives me a break from thinking about viruses. BBC drama at its best IMHO - it's all down to the plot and the acting- brilliant :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Blech

I steel myself to begin reading over 50 FACs, and the first words I encounter on the page are about green pus ??? Trust you to start me off laughing ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Green pus is good. It is a sign of a life. I'm sorry to have added to the (too) long a list— but duty calls. Content, and especially FA level content, is why we spend so long working here. All I have to offer in my defence is that my contributions may be pus and pooh to you, but they are intellectual bread and butter to me. Affection, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte FAC

Thank you for submitting Phagocyte for FA. I apologize for not doing this sooner. My excuse is, well, I did not have access to internet over the weekend, but I probably would have waited until the very last second to submit (regardless of if I had connection or not because of my constant worrying). Thanks for pushing me forward. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Eulemur, it had be nominated this week because I have taken leave from the lab to look after you and the article. Don't be too quick to respond to any advice at the FAC; it might not be good advice and (though I am sure you will not) don't take any negative comments personally. Be polite to the reviewers for without their comments we will not succeed. Most important of all - don't worry, all the hardest work has been done. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte

No need to apologise for correcting my mistakes or when I've worsened the prose! Revert and correct at will. Colin°^Talk 22:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

• Colin, I'm so grateful for your help with this difficult article. :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Graham, many thanks for the unique barnstar. I'm really very touched. I've identified rotavirus and Hep C, but what's the orange coral-like image? BTW: I found the "No higher resolution available." statement below the image-page amusing and apt. Colin°^Talk 21:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Colin, it's an anaerobic bacterium called actinomyces. I know we haven't worked on this one, but I wanted to include a bacterium in the barnstar but I did not want to give you gonorrhoea :-) Graham Colm ^Talk 21:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I should hope not! Now let's keep this clean or Sandy will be along to tell us off like a couple of naughty schoolboys. Colin°^Talk 22:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

If we are lucky, she is not watching :-) Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Date_formatting_and_linking_poll/Autoformatting_responses

Regarding your comment in opposition to date autoformatting, I'd like to point out that date autoformatting and date autolinking are two different things. It's possible to autoformat dates without having them be linked, and vice versa. The syntax for doing so is more complicated than it otherwise needs to be, and some developers would like to simplify things so it's easier to have autoformatting without autolinking (or both, or neither.) --Sapphic (talk) 00:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Sapphic, thanks for this clarification, but I still think it's a waste of editors' time given that the vast majority of readers do not have accounts and no-one knows how many that have tick their no preference box. Graham Colm ^Talk 11:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I can understand the "putting markup around dates is too much effort" argument (though I don't agree with it) and if you still feel that way in light of the fact that the proposed replacement software (which is what the poll is actually asking about, if you can decipher the jargon) would allow unregistered readers to see a consistent date format (site-wide or specified per-article) then I'd ask that you clarify your reasoning on the poll page, so that people won't end up arguing over whether you were "fully informed" or not. Cheers, --Sapphic (talk) 06:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

lol

You commented against someone who wrote "oppose has same initials as WP:OR which is prohibited here. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)". I find it utterly hilarious, by the way. Don't worry about me. I know exactly where people would stand on me, who to expect to appear, and I have a strong belief that these voting columns are going to pass over 100. Hell, the campaigning by various members of Wikipedia Review against me will be sure to bring out a crowd. Just enjoy the show. As I stated, I won't badger people who oppose. If they have some legitimate concerns, I will contact them about it. As you can see, I don't have any life or death need for the tools, and I am perfectly content with the power I have in other projects. Could I benefit from them? Sure. By enough to make it utterly important? Nah. But to be honest, no one could really benefit that much from them. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 00:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Prose issues

I respect not trying to list all of the problems with prose, but it's generally unhelpful to get vague notions of poor prose without at least a couple of examples. If I have no idea what you are looking at then I cannot possibly fix it. Most of the prose hasn't been touched in awhile, so I'm sure it could use some assistance. Nevertheless, some people say there are prose issues when there is actually just confusion over events (i.e. someone close to the project doesn't realize that a particular point was not explained well for those who know nothing about it), while other times there are real issues with grammer, sentence structure, or just basic flow of text. Without some form of example I cannot fix the problem, and "find a third-party editor" doesn't always fix the issue either (especially if it takes half a year to get a copy editor to the article). So, I respectfully request that you come back to the FAC and provide me with some form of assistance so that I can better understand your qualms with the prose.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

• I understand your frustration. The FAC is on my Watchlist, let's see what other reviewers have to say. I am not going to be drawn into listing all the faults, it would take too much of my time, and it is unfair of you to ask. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't want "all", I don't even want "a lot". I was merely requesting a couple of examples (maybe from broad sides of the spectrum), so that I have an idea of what the overall problem is. If I see an example of what you're saying, then I know what to look through the rest of the article for.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I see another reviewer has provided some examples, and these a just from the Lead. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:09, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Don't know if you've been busy, but I've made my (first) full sweep of the article. I wonder if you'd mind taking a gander at the edits (I provided a full diff at the FAC) to see if I'm at least hitting the mark with most of your concerns.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bignole, I have been very busy, but both your article and its FAC are on my watchlist. I saw your copy edits, and you are getting close to the mark. I did, however, notice earlier this evening, that another reviewer questioned the standard of the prose in a section of the article. I keep all FACs that I have commented on (and the article) on my watchlist until Sandy, Raul, or Karranas promotes or archives (and often much longer). Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

If there are "so many" problem with the prose, maybe you could just start a thread on the talk page and start listing issues. I'm sorry, and this is not personal, but these vague notions are not helpful at all. The FAC process is clear that all concerns must be detailed and I had to wrestle just a few issues out of you (which only came after another editor pointed out some issues). All I see is you picking up a couple of issues from one section and applying it to the entire article. I'm sorry, but that is not productive for me or the article.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The FAC instructions say "a specific rationale that can be addressed" they do not say "all concerns must be detailed". My objection was based on Criterion 1a, in that the prose was not up to FA standard and required copy-editing by a third party and this is a specific rationale that can be addressed. There has been a discussion on this [7]. My comment about "so many" problems, was in an edit summary after the FAC was closed, where I corrected a few more mistakes in an effort to help demonstrate the issues.Graham Colm ^Talk 15:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

But again, it's vague. You corrected 3 things, one of this was merely a word I left out when I rewrote the sentence and another being slightly subjective. You then proceeded to label the whole page a problem based on that. Getting you to acknowledge problem areas is like pulling teeth. You say the prose is bad for the whole article, so I c/e the whole article (incidentally creating a couple of new problems when I leave out a word). You've never gone back to the FAC to respond directly to the changes. You haven't acknowledged anything that was constructively done to address your concerns (i.e. You finally pointed to the plot section after requests for examples, and never bothered to say if that has been fixed to your liking). To me, it feels like you haven't read the entire page since the first time (not sure if you read it all then, or just stopped after the plot section). I say this because your edits today were to the Merchandise section, which was the section someone brought up before I finished c/eing the article. I acknowledged that I needed to go through it again (it's not perfect the first time, and I had to even correct one of your edits that changed the meaning of the sentence in the lead paragraphs). But seems more like I'm fighting an uphill battle with you, instead of a natural cooperative relationship that Wikipedia is supposed to be about. But, if that's how you prefer to operate, fine. I'll do it on my own then.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

For goodness sake calm down, the FAC was was closed because the article was not ready to be promoted. I didn't close the nomination. I know it is a big disappointment for you but it is not my fault and FA reviewers are not obliged nor encouraged to fix articles. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand both my tone and my "disappointment". I don't care that it was closed beyond the "I guess I'll have to do it again later" feeling. My disappointment is just over your actions, or lack there of. Everyone else, for the most part, tried to identify their concerns at least in a "generalized specificity" (i.e. They didn't list everything, but they did provide examples of problems in sections they read and followed up with those concerns when addressed). They pointed to things that were unclear, poorly worded, etc. You, on the other hand, chose to say the whole article was a mess but not provide any actual evidence to support it. You pointed to a couple of things in one section, that was it. In the world of statistics, you just attempted to take a sample of one town and generalize to an entire state with nothing to back it up. I did not ask you to fix anything, so that is neither here nor there. You are required to read the whole article if you are going to make a claim about the entire article, and I do not feel that you did that. I came to you respectfully multiple times to either assist me in understanding your concerns or review the changes made to the article to see if they addressed those concerns you never detailed. The first time I came was to request some examples of your concerns, which you basically took as me saying "Please list every minute thing you see wrong". Then you point to another editor's lead concerns (which were not that horrible) as justification that the whole article has problems. Finally you provide a couple of plot confusion problems (not really a grammatical issue). Once I've c/e'd the whole article (which, you apparently watchlist but never returned to acknowledge the changes) I asked if you've take a look at it again (which is actually the correct thing to do when reviewers have not been on the page in awhile). Your responses were, "I have it on my watchlist" or "someone else brought up concerns". Not only did you deflect the responsibilities of seeing if I address any issues you saw, but you apparently did not even recognize that the other reviewers concerns were before I had even finished the first c/e. This is my last statement, because I don't want to continue to bother you with this any further, but I felt like you disrespected this FAC with half-hearted efforts to acknowledge anything that actually happened with the article by deflecting everything onto someone else (e.g., Another editor left some comments, or let's see what others say) instead of just answering the questions I asked you personally. Maybe this is all because you have your own FAC that opened on the same day and you were/are busy with that. I don't know, and probably won't know. I merely wanted to inform you of my concerns over your specific actions with the FAC. Cheers, and have a good weekend.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 15:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Accepted! I apologize for berating you about your review as well. As frustrated as I felt, it wasn't my place to criticize your reviewing efforts. I would love additional feedback, because I find that many things can still be clarified (just check the article's talk page and you'll see there was an issue with "counselor", as it's not a term really recognized in the UK beyond someone who is a psychiatrist or therapist).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 17:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Butting in

Thanks for "butting in" at my talk; it's helpful when others respond to those queries. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:47, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte

Hi there, I've been messing with your lead diff. Please see these changes as suggestions and revert any you disagree with. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, your edits are very helpful and the lead is better. Someone might ask for reference for the "oxidative burst", but his will be a doddle. The FAC is going slowly but well. Thanks again. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:22, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Added a review, just on the off-chance. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Well done! Colin°^Talk 18:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh my, after all these months, books, photocopied papers and drawing diagrams. I didn't spot this. So many thanks to you, Colin, for all your indispensable help; it is your FA star as much as Eulemur's and mine. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Well thanks for putting up with me! Your generous attribution is too much, though. You guys supplied the content. Anyway, my bronze star is bigger than yours :-) Colin°^Talk 19:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

		Civility Award
		Your responses at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Phagocyte have set the new standard for civility among FAC nominators. Thank you for providing such a wonderful example to new and experienced editors at FAC. Karanacs (talk) 16:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks Karanacs - I'm lost for words :-) Graham Colm ^Talk 16:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Obesity

Hey Graham No offense taken but shouldn't one at least get a week or two to clear up the issues? Over a hundred edits have been make in the last 24 hours.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi James, I only gave my opinion and advice, I don't archive or promote FACS—in fact I don't know how to. There is no shame in withdrawing and re-nominating later. To be blunt, I also think the med project has really let you down. Is this your first FAC? I don't know, but my first one was a bloody disaster, and entirely my fault. My the rush to improve the article, and dare I say impress others, made matters worse. It took me a year to finally get the coveted star. Having said this, an Oppose is not always permanent. But, I think Obesity does not fulfill the FA criteria. If you can address all the issues— I suspect there will be more—within a week or two or three, (there is no time limit on FACS), then I will so happilly change my mind and support. Sincerely, my best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Understand. To tell you the truth I do not think it is up to FA right now either. I was mainly looking for advice and this is the best way to get it. Have tried peer review but that doesn't get much interest. I do not think many of the current medicine FA are up to FA status, but that is another issue. Thanks for the comments. Cheers --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Phagocyte FA

Dear Graham, Thank you very much for all of the help; "Phagocyte" could not have made FA without it. This project was at first intimidating, but with the help of kind people on wikipedia (such as you) I was able to make it through alive. It was a pleasure working with you. This is an experience that I definitely will not forget. Noah. --Eulemur2008 (talk) 23:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations

This user helped promote phagocytes to featured article status.

Thank you for your guidance; from a few lines of disconnected text to a truly stellar article. I am very impressed with the readability; it is all too common to take such complex topics and bury them in minutia. This article will serve the community well. Unfortunately, I will now have to teach cellular immunity to a student that is likely more knowledgeable of the details than am I!!!! Feel free to come visit us at Croatan on Noah Day - to be celebrated every April 7 - for years to come. --JimmyButler (talk) 01:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi GrahamColm

I responded to your comment at the FAC page for History of the Han Dynasty. I truly understand the concern; I'm still making efforts to reduce the article's prose size. However, it's very tricky, because in a lot of cases it entails rewording sentences rather than removing them altogether. It's hard to judge at this point what can be regarded as extraneous, since much of the "extra fat" in the prose has already been cut by User:Nlu and I in a wave of copy-edits last month. Perhaps you could suggest something that needs to be either reworded or cut? I ask this because I honestly don't know what else to cut without hurting the flow and clarity of the article. Thanks.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a difficult because this interesting subject is completely new to me. My gut reaction is to suggest simply dividing it into two articles straight down the middle; "History of the Western Han Dynasty" and "History of the Eastern Han Dynasty". I know that this would probably mean sacrificing this FAC, but who knows, two FAs might result! As I say, this not something I know anything about and you might think this is a ridiculous idea, if so please forgive my ignorance. Bye the way, the article is beautifully written on the whole. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is an ignorant idea at all; it does make logical sense to make such a split considering the interruption of the Han Dynasty by Wang Mang's brief regime. However, in addition to what you've already mentioned about this article's current featured candidate status, another reason it would bad to split the article is the fact that it is already a branch article of Han Dynasty. I think it would be a bit excessive to make branch articles of branch articles. That might make it a bit too confusing for the readers who want to know where they can locate everything.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, you are the expert, but the second half of the article would only be one mouse click away. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:23, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Failure

My nomination for History of the Han Dynasty has failed. However, I plan to renominate it in the very near future. In addressing your concern over prose size, I reduced the prose size today by roughly 4 KB, but at the cost of what I would consider useful information. What's left in the article is what I consider the bare bones, only what is essential to understand the topic (which covers four centuries, mind you). Since you were one of two people who opposed the article (against three who supported it), I would like you to spend some of your time reviewing my article in full and suggesting what else should be cut if you have further objections about its size. I do not intend to have this article fail again when I renominate it. Therefore, I would expect at the bare minimum that you read each section and tell me exactly which sentences you think aren't valuable enough to keep. Thank you.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I can't speak on behalf of the FAC delegate that archived the nomination, but I guess that it was felt that a consensus had not been reached. Given your outstanding record of FA contributions, I am sure that you know FAC is not a vote. My strengths and weaknesses as a FAC reviewer are well known and these—I am sure—were, and always will be, taken into account. I think you credit me with more influence than I have. My oppose was based essentially on my concerns over the length of the article and I offered advice on how this could possibly be solved. I am not going to reiterate my advice at any future nomination because it is preserved in the archive for all to read. Thank you for the invitation to review the article in depth, but there are other articles which interest me more, and I don't have much free time from my job. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Book tool?

Hi Graham. BB is not very bright. What is the book tool? Brianboulton (talk) 16:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Got it! So, I can make my Antarctic articles into a book? Woweee, I'll look forward to playing with that! Brianboulton (talk) 16:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to share it, this could be the first Featured Book! Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review for SR Leader Class steam locomotive.

Greetings! I recall that you did a thorough proof-read of the LSWR N15 class article during its FA nomination some time back, and am wondering whether you would like to have a look at this article, which is currently under Peer Review? Thanks, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for helping to clarify a section of the leader paragraph on the 'Leader' article. It certainly needed dong, but its easy to miss things when writing the article. Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 10:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do about the 'design issue'. There are a couple more images that I have found that I need to scan, then put into the article. They are official BR images taken during the prototype's construction, and should add interest to the article. Thanks for the positive feedback, though! Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 23:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I am looking forward to this FAC. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk

On behalf of the editors of the above article, I wish once again to thank you for your suggestions in improving this article, as they have helped ensure that it is now an FA. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 09:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Avian influenza question

Thanks for adding the list of subtypes! I was debating doing that but couldn't decide if it really properly belonged to (or rather, needed to be expanded in) Avian influenza page or the Influenza A page. That brings me to my question. What, in your opinion, is the scope of the Avian influenza page? From its talk page discussion, I gather it is about the infectious disease rather than the virus (the latter treated in H5N1 and related articles). As far as I can tell, though, the infectious disease associated with H5N1 is also described in a sub-article of H5N1, viz., Transmission and infection of H5N1. Similarly, the other avian epizootics, alluded to above, are listed in the Influenza A page and there's a case to be made that they be expanded there. Wouldn't Avian influenza then be better off as a dab page? I put some of the same questions to the primary author of the H5N1 page, User:WAS 4.250, but he hasn 't edited WP in over a week. So, perhaps you can clear this up for me. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

We are lucky to have Influenza as a Featured Article; its coverage of the danger of avian strains to humans is short but accurate. Most of the other articles are in a much poorer state and there is much duplication across the board. I think most readers who look up "avian influenza" do so because they are interested in the potential threat of highly pathogenic strains of H5N1 and a few others—mainly H7N3, H7N7 and H9N2—to humans. H5N1 which redirects to Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 is the best article for readers who want more details on avian flu and I agree that Avian influenza would serve better as a disambiguation page. However, this might cause a problem because some readers might want to read about influenza in birds but Influenzavirus A and Orthomyxoviridae are, I agree with you, in need of attention. Of the other articles, Global spread of H5N1 provides some valuable historical background but the poorly titled Transmission and infection of H5N1 adds little that is not covered better in other articles. The articles on the individual minor strains such as Influenza A virus subtype H1N2 are useful but all of them are in need of work. Lastly the Template:flu, which has not been edited since November 2007 has little to no value. To summarise, I agree with you in that the core article on avian influenza should be based on H5N1 and not Avian influenza. It would be a good start in cleaning up this—apart form Influenza—untidy collection of related articles. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Graham, for your detailed and helpful reply. I think I'll start by updating Influenza A virus subtype H5N1, or rather making sure that the information there is up to date. I noticed that it was written mainly between October 2005 and May 2006. I'll use this time also to figure out the best organization for the template. Will likely be sounding you out for feedback (and WAS 4.250 also, when s/he returns). Hope that will be OK! Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Your are welcome. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

my tumble

Thx for your kindness, Graham. The swelling has mostly done down and I can hobble around. Now I know what it feels like to be 100 years old! Tony (talk) 07:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I know it's not usual with FAC but

Could you please point out the rest of the issues you have with the article so I can fix them? I've already been through this run-around with FAC once, two copyedits, a peer review after waiting through a backlog up to high heaven, and a second FAC that seems to have crept along for over a month now with only one person opposing. In all honesty I'm really worn out from jumping through hoops for this article, so please just point out where the errors are so they can be fixed and I can hopefully turn your oppose into a support. :\--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have made some edits (suggestions) on how to improve the prose. The article is still not up to FA standard IMHO; it is not the quantity of copy-edits that counts; it is the quality. I know my opposition has ruined your day, and I am sorry, but I have to give honest reviews. The FAC delegates know my strengths and weaknesses and they will no doubt take these into account when deciding on promoting or archiving this FAC. But, as it stands, I think the article is not ready for the FA star. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

A request

Would it be possible for you to take a look at Clements Markham, and if possible comment on the peer review? The article needs another pair of eyes, since only I have done any real work on it, and although it reads OK to me, other views might be quite different. By the way, it's not all polar stuff. Brianboulton (talk) 12:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes of course Brian, I will read the article and comment at PR this weekend. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Swine influenza

I'm very glad to see you, as one of our top virologists, working on this article - it is getting over one million page views per day and was in a terrible state until quite recently. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tim, I thought it might be getting a lot of hits, but a million! In real life I have been getting about 100 swine flu-related telephone calls every day. It's my birthday today and I am enjoying some beer, but I will give the article a lot of my attention over the weekend. Clearly, it is very important for Wikipedia's respected reputation to get this one right. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy birthday! I'll lift a beer in your honor tonight! I've put a lot of work into influenza and swine flu over the past few days myself - although I'm always mindful that this isn't really my field so have no hesitation in correcting the text. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Tim, you are a typically modest, gifted Scot. I have influenza on my watchlist and I saw your admirable work in keeping this FA up-to-date. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

My son and I both have had some creeping respiratory crud for a week now, but frankly I'm far more concerned about asthma than swine flu. I may be the only person alive who's been to their doctor twice in the past week without so much as mentioning old H1N1 :) Hope you have a great birthday! Ping me if you think there's anything I can do to help with the article. Maralia (talk) 22:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday, Graham !!! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday Graham. Enjoy a Newcastle for me. --Laser brain (talk) 02:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I added some sources, for the industrialization and economic cost of swine flu for pork industry, as well as for the fact that the first isolation occurred in 1930. I also added the template {copyedit} : yes, I'm foreigner, but the article already contain several section wrote by myself, corrected by native English speakers. For a native speaker, that a piece of cake to correct this. Other issues are common sense : swine influenza is older than 1930, interspecies may have occurred before 1930, pork dying in ancient times were an important income lost for farmers, which, from what I know, tamed swine at least 2200 years ago (one of my reading on Han dynasty life, roman empire). Nothing amazing in this, but it stay good to remember this to readers.

I also noticed you are creating diagrams, note that Inkscape (WP:GL) and the SVG format is GREAT for such works.

Regards, Yug (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Yug, yes it is important to let readers know that swine influenza has been around for a long time. The article does require some work to fix the problems with the grammar, and I will see to this. It also requires more substance on influenza in pigs and I will have a look at some of the reviews in the veterinary journals and see what can be usefully added. I understand and agree with your concerns that the article should not be dominated by the latest outbreak. I'll discuss this and another issues with you later on the article's talk page. I have Inkscape, but I am finding it difficult to learn which is why most of my diagrams are in png format. I have seen some beautiful diagrams drawn with Inkscape and it is very frustrating for me. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your answer, we will see this later.

For Inkscape, some specific methods are need to learn it :

• 1. Reverse-engineering: open other SVGs, move each object (Ctrl+F1+clic) ; 2. Use SVG of other users to customize it and so create a new diagram :]

Some tools are especially important :

• 1. the selector (F1) , then clic to select an object or (Ctrl+clic) to select an object lock into a group ; 2. the node tool (F2) to edit paths ; 3. the bezier pencil (Shift+F6) to create paths, one clic to start, two clic to finish it ; 4. The Fill and Stroke box (Ctrl+Shift+F), to customize colors.

(I want encourage you to move to Inkscape because I see you make a good bitmap job :], that's encouraging !)

I will use this talk to start a little tutorial. Regards, Yug (talk) 17:53, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

this made me laugh

"First off, don't patronise by being a pedant."

Is this irony given edit? David D. (Talk) 18:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

And me too, a single animal in several rivers at the same time :-) Thanks for this David, just because we borrow the word(s), it does not mean we have to borrow the grammar. Best wishes, Graham.Graham Colm ^Talk 21:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C7orf30

Hey Graham I noticed your comment at the AfD and thought I'd recommend you rephrased this, as your argument will probably not be counted by the closing admin since it isn't based on policy, see Wikipedia:INTERESTING for a discussion of this point. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Graham-

I'm writing a chapter in a textbook of emergency medicine (Tintinalli's Emergency Medicine, 7th ed.), and I would like to include your diagrams of Hepatitis A,B, and C serologies. I've read the licenses, but I am new to this thing and still don't quite get how I'm supposed to credit you. May I use the images (there will be a print and a web-based format)? And if I may, how do I go about crediting you?

Please advise. Thanks!

Soerdoc (talk) 17:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I am checking with a more experienced colleague, but I think you are free to do anything you want with them, as I have released into the public domain. I will confirm this for you later. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

As they are in the public domain, there is no legal obligation to credit Graham or ask him permission for use, and you are free to publish them in any way you wish. However, if you would like to credit him as the author, purely as a courtesy, then please feel free to do so. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Tim. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi

You could try working on the prose yourself, since you would know what you perceive wrong with it. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 22:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC))

I have replied at FAC, where this discussion belongs. I know how bad it feels to receive opposition to an FAC, because I know how hard editors work on these articles, but I have discovered that it is best to take advice, and not to dismiss it. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The article has been copyedited by HJ and Malleus Fatuorum, and is awaiting further copyediting. Would you reconsider your view? (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 02:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC))

• While your advice to remain civil might have been intended towards DocKino, the phrasing made it appear that it was directed towards me. I think that my responses have been pretty civil so far. Even as DocKino repeatedly insulted me, I have not directed any insults or attacks towards him. My only comment was that his treatment did not make me feel like working with him. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 22:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC))

My advice was generic. I reiterate; working with opposing editors and not fighting them is the most efficient and cordial way of achieving featured status for a contribution. This [8], was, on reflection, the most beneficial experience I have had on Wikipedia. Listen to them, and work with them. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

SECR N class

Hello GrahamColm, I'm just wondering whether you are interested in undertaking a peer review of the above article for prose issues if you have the time. I'm thinking of 'kicking it upstairs' (putting it up for FA as the vanguard of a raft of six articles regarding Maunsell designs of steam locomotive), as it were, which is the usual ulterior motive! In the mean time, if there are any projects that you would like me to take a look at (gives me a bit of a break from steam locomotives for a bit), then you know where to find me. Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 22:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have added the article and its PR page to my Watchlist, and I will comment in due course. I work on rather esoteric virology articles—take a look at Hepatitis B—if you could honestly tell me how far you get until you no longer understand it, this would be very useful. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 23:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi again. As a lay-man, I though it was quite a good read, and I like the structure of the article, which leads from the virus itself to its wider, more 'cultural' (its not the right word, but its late at night!) context. However, I'd look at the 'Genome' section again, as a few terms suddenly appear for the first time. As a layman who only did GCSE Biology a few years ago, I have absolutely no clue what an 'AUG start codon' is. If there is a chance to wikilink it, then I'd do so. If not, put the full title and a short explanation near its first instance. Otherwise, most other 'difficult' verbeage has already been wikilinked. So I congratulate you and your fellow editors, and whilst I realise it will be difficult to get round the technical bits, if you can make it palatable to the non-initiated, then it would make an excellent article superlative. I hope this adds some food for thought! --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 22:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

It does indeed, you might be surprised to learn how valuable this kind of feedback is—particularly to a, blinkered, old editor who has immersed himself in the study of viruses for over thirty years :-) Thanks, and best wishes. I will get to the locomotive article presently—I promise. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

FAC Request

Hi there, I have just sent Fantasy Black Channel to FA Review after reading your advice on Arular. If you have the time, I'd appreciate any comments, support, or even a constructive oppose here. Cheers. Rafablu88 (talk) 18:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello Rafablu88, and I am pleased to meet you; I will take a look at all the FA candidates in the morning—it's approaching midnight in the UK—but I prefer to work on the the older candidates first. If I have the time, I will review your nomination in due course. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Saw your comment on OM's talkpage...

Unfortunately it seems our friend Orangemarlin (talk · contribs) has flown the coop; last post from him was mid-March. I'm assuming he was fed up with the quack beat, but one never knows... I do hope he comes back to us soon refreshed, but I like to be optimistic to the point of denialism at times. Aunt Entropy (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I am worried now—not about the chickenpox article—but for OM. I will try email. Thanks for this, best wishes. Graham, Graham Colm ^Talk 21:05, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Er...no

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Bravedog (talk) 21:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

My objection was to your striking other editors' comments. If you persist, I will block you. Best wishes, Graham Colm ^Talk 21:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:9863 lores.jpg

File:9863 lores.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:9863 lores.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:9863 lores.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 12:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

ToothpasteTime

Graham, would you be so kind as to delete his vanity page as well as having blocked him? carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 18:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I will take a look. His edits to Susan Boyle were libellous, hence the block. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Deleted as per WP:COI. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for a peer review and copyedit

Hi Graham, I have greatly expanded Battle of Bosworth Field and plan to bring it to FAC soon. The article is currently undergoing peer reviews. I would like to ask for your assistance, thinking that the article might be of interest to you (I presume the Battle of Bosworth Field is of national interest). Could you go through the article and comment on its suitability for FA? A peer review is at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Bosworth Field/archive1. If you could also perform a copyedit of the article, that would be most appreciated. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I would be pleased to attempt a CE of the article. This is not my subject, so feel free to revert anything you don't agree with. I won't be offended. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:47, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Your aid is greatly appreciated. Jappalang (talk) 22:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Graham. I would like to run this by you. I was trying to imply by "however Richard divided his army into three groups" that Richard's 10,000 army was divided into portions smaller than Henry's whole army. In the ensuing fight, Northumberland did not engage the enemy; it was only Norfolk's group and a portion of Richard's force who fought Oxford's men, making it a fairly balanced fight by numbers. Would "Richard's force outnumbered Henry's, however Richard divided his army into three groups, each smaller than Henry's total force. Henry concentrated most of his army ..." or something to that effect be fine? The conclusion of each division to be smaller than Henry's entire force might be construed as OR though... (no source has explicitly stated as such even though they have given numbers for each component)... Jappalang (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

A quick reply—I have to go to the lab—I think this would be better. I would prefer "Richard's forces" (plural), and, if the numbers are sourced and the arithmetic is right, then this is research, but not original research which is fine. I often notice that many editors—not necessarily you—don't know the important difference; research should be encouraged. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 04:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, done. Jappalang (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again Graham, but Hartfelt mentioned some salient points at the MILHIST peer review. I think he is correct, readers outside United Kingdom might be confused by the structure in the article at the moment. I am going to do some heavy changes to the way the background is presented and perhaps to other areas. Could we put the copyediting on hold until I sorted the issues out? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 07:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes of course, I will keep out of your way but please let me know if and when you need me again; I was enjoying working on the article. It makes a pleasant change to viruses. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 08:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Graham. Could you start copyediting this article again? If you spot any redundant or possibly non-pertinent sections, please feel free to mark them or eliminate them. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 03:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the copyedits. Regarding Edward's sporadic attempts to recover the fugitives, Edward as stated did not view Henry as much of a threat, hence he only made occasional requests to Francis for the repatriation of the Tudors. Nonetheless, the removal of the trailing clause does seem to keep the sentence neater without loss of critical information. Jappalang (talk) 11:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi, do you know where I can ask for peer reviewing for Jovan Vladimir. Best wishes,--Vojvodae 19:33, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the procedure is given here WP:PR. Best wishes and good luck with the article. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

SECR N class part two...

Hello Graham, enjoy your meeting (if you can enjoy them, that is!). Just to let you know I've archived the above peer review (nothing was added after a flurry of reviews a couple of weeks ago), as everything seemed to be resolved. Consequentially, I've decided to put this article up for FA, and I wish to request help in isolating bad prose and railway-related over-jargon. Would it be possible for you to put up a bit of a review if you have a spare ten minutes? As usual, it would be of great help in creating another high-quality article. If there's anything you are currently working on and you desperately need an outside perspective, just give us a shout! Cheers, --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 10:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Starvin' Marvin (South Park)

Hey Graham, it's Hunter Kahn. You asked me to let you know when I've nominated Starvin' Marvin (South Park) for a peer review, which I've just done. Any feedback or help you could provide would be very much appreciated! I've already addressed the specific problems brought up at the FAC as well as a few others... — Hunter Kahn _(c) 05:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Note

Thanks for the compliments and interest in the article Jovan Vladimir. As for the sources, note that J. Vladimir is not a well known historical figure. Sources about him a rather rare (especially in English), and those that mention him do that often with just a sentence or two. Cheers, VVVladimir (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Oklahoma City bombing FAC

Thanks for leaving comments at the FAC. I have addressed the issues you raised. Concerning the additional citations, could you point out what other occurrences you think need to be cited? I always like little numbers after my sentences, but if I missed some I'd like to address that as soon as possible. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 20:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have replied on the FAC page. Best of luck with the rest of your FA nomination. Happy editing. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 00:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I added a source for the statement you wanted a citation for if you want to take another look. Thank you for supporting the nomination, I appreciate it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 19:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw them. The FAC has my full support. The prose still needs a little work in places but there are no major problems, in my mind. This is one of the best prepared candidates I have seen this year. Well done. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for rewording the statement, it definitely reads better. I've been putting off the nomination for a long time, figuring that a controversial subject like this would be difficult enough to get passed, and had multiple people look at the prose and sources before hand. I did a peer review and attempted an A-class review although I couldn't get anyone to review the article. I have high hopes of getting it passed on the first try, and helpful comments like yours will definitely improve the article when others look it over. Again, thanks for all of your help, I appreciate it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hawaii hotspot FAC

Thanks for your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hawaii hotspot/archive1. I have addressed your issues and I am awaiting your reply. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 20:26, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have replied on the FAC page. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hi Graham, could I ask that you take a look at a couple of questions I've asked at the virus wikiproject? Thanks Smartse (talk) 11:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and I have replied there. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Note

I'm about to run (my summer engagements finally kicked in) but I noticed that you're editing the article. If you're doing your suggestions at the FA or Tony's, you mustn't waste your time; I'll take care of them as soon as I get back in a few hours, first thing. Of course, any other tweaks would be dearly appreciated, so thanks! ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 22:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Replied

Replied per edit summery, "I prefer this version, please discuss this on the Talk Page". Though you knew, sorry for the misunderstanding. Link.[9] ChyranandChloe (talk) 22:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, no need to apologise. I am trying to make the flow of the content more logical, and address an all too common question. Please see the Talk Page. I didn't intend to re-format the list. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 22:46, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Well, that's the highest praise a medical article can get, isn't it? :) That's what we're here for—glad it could be of service. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

On the contrary, thank you for an excellent contribution. Graham, Graham Colm ^Talk 22:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Xqbot

I've changed the behavior of my bot as requested. It doesn't fix mismatch disambiguation anymore. Instead of this it writes an exceptions log (see de:User:Xqbot/Wartung) which gives the posibility to act manually on doubtful interwiki links. This behavior is testet for several weeks on all the other wikis. Would you please unblock my bot. It is not very helpful to ignore all the actualized links on the en: wiki. Thanks in advancce. Xqt (talk) 20:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have unblocked the bot as requested, but I will monitor its activity and reinstate the block if problems persist. Best wishes, Graham Colm ^Talk 21:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

NIH workshop

Hi, Graham, I just got back from the NIH workshop, which I think went very well. The Wikipedians volunteering to support the new NIH members was very warmly received by the NIH, and acknowledged by the chief NIH organizer, Marin Allen, in her opening remarks. The preparations were exhausting, though, otherwise I would've replied earlier; I'll fill you in with more details by email this weekend, once I've had a chance to sleep more than three hours a night. :P Thanks again, Proteins (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your input! A few comments to clear up some of your remaining suggestions...

• Can you explain "fused participle"? I am fairly familiar with grammar but am not clear on why that sentence structure does not work.
• What sounds wrong about "They have new fights outside the bar"? They make a habit of fighting recreationally.
• Matt Damon was recognized for his performance in Good Will Hunting, so I assume that's why he was considered a candidate. Should I try to find a citation that mentions this?
• For the "stepped" term, I asked an editor who has knowledge of filmmaking. Maybe his answer will help us clarify how the term is meant to be used.

Happy editing! —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:52, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for the compliment. I have made a few edits which I think resolve these remaining issues and added my support for the FAC. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:41, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

• I started discussion at Talk:Fight Club (film)#Expanding themes. If you have any specific questions that could help improve the "Themes" section, ask there and I can retrieve information from the sources I can access. —Erik (talk • contrib) 22:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Andy Walsh, formerly known as Laser brain, is okay with the expanded "Themes" section. Do you feel like the section is sufficient, or could something more be done with it? I'm open to suggestions and happy to expand accordingly. —Erik (talk • contrib) 15:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I was reading the section when I saw your message. I will get back to you. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 15:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Diarrhea

Hi,you added a few more sections to this article but without any references. I did a search and found two of the four you added. Would you mind putting your reference into the others that you are using? I think some of the section I put in is a duplicate to yours but I am not sure to be honest so I'd be interested in seeing your ref on them. Thanks a lot for your attentions to this. Please take your time, I've been watching you expanding so maybe I missed your addition of the refs as I am still going through things. Again, thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• Hi Crohnie, nice to hear from you. I'm working late in the lab and I was interupted mid-edit. The section I added will be easy to reference; when I can find the time. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, no rush, I'll look forward to reading. :) Thanks, don't work too hard. Have a good day or night. --CrohnieGal^Talk 18:21, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Meningitis

Yes, it is true, reference seems to only refer to Streptococcus pneumoniae. On the other hand it should be noted that Streptococcus pneumoniae is a major aetiological agent for pneumonia and meningitis, among both young children and elderly people all over the world (CDC (1997).

• Hi, first please remember to sign messages by typing ~~~~. Second, this belongs on the discussion page of the article, not here. Third, I know about the importance of pneumococci, but if you consider that a mention real time PCR is important, (which it probably is not), you should not use a primary source, a review article would be better. Fourth, there was also a mistake in your edit, there was and unclosed <ref> tag. Graham Colm ^Talk 16:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Starvin' Marvin (South Park)

Hey Graham, you might remember me from the failed FAC review of Starvin' Marvin (South Park). At the time, most of the feedback I received was that the sourcing and content were good, but that the article was badly in need of a copy edit to address grammatical concerns. I've since addressed some of the specific problems that were pointed out (as well as some others that weren't) and made some fixes that came from a peer review I requested. I believe at the time of the review, you indiciated you'd be willing to look the article over again after the copy edits were done. Before I nominate it for FAC again, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look and letting me know if you think it's ready? Whenever you find some time. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn _(c) 17:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Universal flu vaccine

Read this interesting article in the New Scientist today. If you can't read it all, let me know and I'll send it to you. I'd be interested in your thoughts on the subject and thoughts on the article. Cheers, Colin°^Talk 21:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Colin, yes I read this earlier today. I'm at work Saturday morning, but I will reply in full tomorrow afternoon, best wishes etc. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Werner Mölders

Hi, Graham. I am currently opposing this article at FAC. The lead (which is really as far as I have got) has needed considerable prose attention, and I am a bit worried about the rest of it. Would it be possible for you to take a quick look at the first couple of sections and perhaps leave a comment or two? My own view is that the prose should have been sorted out at peer review, but of course the article never went there. It has GA status, which may have led its editors into a false impression as to its quality. If you could spare the time I'd be grateful. Brianboulton (talk) 18:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes Brian, I read this article earlier today—without my FAC reviewers hat on—I shall take a more critical look at it and comment accordingly. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I see I have left this too long, my apologies. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Icos FAC

I've nominated a biology-type article, Icos, at FAC. Would you be interested in reviewing it? Shubinator (talk) 04:45, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have left a few comments at FAC. Graham Colm ^Talk 12:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look over them and make improvements later today. Shubinator (talk) 19:04, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar ta

Nice star. Thanks. It's a pleasure to work with someone who both knows that "bacterium" is singular and how to use the generic indefinite article. --Milkbreath (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I've got to tell you, that article was a real treat to read. I've loved phagocytes ever since I found out about them as a kid—these little critters amoebaing about inside us of their own volition eating the bad guys. Not just showing them the door or tying their shoelaces together, but eating them. Slime molds, too, though I only learned of them in college. I'd always thought the slime molds might hold secrets about development and differentiation, but when I read in the article how there are phagocytes inside slime molds, I think I had a mini-orgasm. Very groovy. --Milkbreath (talk) 22:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Adenovirus 4.jpg

File:Adenovirus 4.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Adenovirus 4.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Adenovirus 4.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hexon.png

Hi Graham, I took the liberty to convert (redo) your Hexon.png to SVG. Antares42 (talk) 20:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, please feel free to convert any of my png diagrams to svg. I have wanted to do this for ages but I don't know how to. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 10:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

International Space Station

Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Peer Review as to whether you feel your original comments have been dealt with, if you see any new issues with the article, and whether or not you believe the article will meet the criteria for Featured Article status. Any new comments you have would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, Colds7ream (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

You might like this...

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 5, 2009. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks I hadn't noticed this. I got off lightly with Phagocyte but I guess this one will attract a lot of edits, not all of which we be helpful. Fortunately, the page is watched by editors on both sides of the Atlantic so any silly edits should be quickly reverted.. I hope. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 11:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Graham Beards. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/International Space Station/archive5.
Message added 16:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Colds7ream (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Virus

If you take a closer look, you will see the 2 of the links were in the caption of the relevant images and the 3rd link was the one which was not linked in the text. Ida Shaw (talk) 09:34, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Repeating links in captions is not necessary. Rotavirus is already linked at the very top of the article and protein molecule redirects to protein, which is already linked. You were right to link nucleic acid at its first occurrence, and I have restored this.Graham Colm ^Talk 09:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Graham Beards. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/International Space Station/archive5.
Message added 14:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Colds7ream (talk) 14:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Final Cut (album)

Hi there. I wonder if you wouldn't mind telling me which version of the article you reviewed, in light of today's edits? Parrot of Doom 21:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the delay in replying, (I've been at work all day). I reviewed this version [10]. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I wouldn't have nominated the article in the state that it was when another user changed it, so just wanted to check. I hope that doesn't make me sound big-headed :) BTW, I'm thinking of nominating a Pink Floyd Featured Topic, there would be 2 FAs, and 2 GAs (3 if Pink Floyd is made a GA). I also have The Wall and Animals to make GA, The Wall possibly an FA. What do you think? Would it be unusual to have a FT where the main article (Pink Floyd) isn't FA or GA yet? Parrot of Doom 18:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I think it would make an excellent FT. It's something I have little experience of but I guess Pink Floyd's not being an FA might be frowned upon by some. I'll have to check the criteria, but I seem to recall that all that is required is an FA somewhere in the pack. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 17:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Ottava

Good call. Just before the wotsit hits the fan Fritzpoll (talk) 21:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Blocking, is for vandals; not for gifted and respected editors. Discussion, albeit heated, is more appropriate IMHO. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Apoc2400 (talk) 08:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

• What about problematic editors? Too much of a coincidence and I must say that I can't assumed good faith for Otta after viewing his numerous block as evidenced in his block log and in his editing bahaviour. That much I can tell. --Dave1185 (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

ketogenic diet

Graham,

I've put ketogenic diet up for peer review in order to push it towards FAC. Could you inspect it with your superior grammar skills and ability with technical prose? Cheers, Colin°^Talk 17:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Colin, you flatter me. I'll make it a priority, but don't expect too much before the weekend. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks very much. I'll be sending your an email shortly. Colin°^Talk 21:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

He, he. I liked your comment here. Do you keep your consciousness in a jar? :-) This is a really tricky one to summarise and I wonder if most people only think about changes in consciousness as degrees of unconsciousness. The list on epilpsy.com gives some idea of the wide variety of possible effects. I need to read some more and hope to find a phrase I can use. Colin°^Talk 20:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Colin, as you have gathered, I didn't like "mind" at all. Actually my consciousness can be radically altered by a jar,(or two). Perhaps, "consciousness" is not the best word. I am at a loss; "perception", perhaps?? At least something that can be measured, unlike the mind. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 20:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

File:May Day Parade 1937 Moscow.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:May Day Parade 1937 Moscow.jpg, 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. NW (Talk) 01:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Castro Khrushchev UN 1960.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Castro Khrushchev UN 1960.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NW (Talk) 01:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)