User talk:DMacks

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


What I would amour right now is some fried chicken.-Homme affamé (talk) 02:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DMacks. It looks like there is an inconsistency between the file name and chemical structure in this image you recently uploaded (carboxylic acid vs amide). Can you have a look? Regards, Marbletan (talk) 12:26, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooops, fixed. Thanks for catching that! DMacks (talk) 13:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I noticed that you uploaded a chemical structure image for eflapegrastim. However, I don't think it's correct. Eflapegrastim seems to be a complex protein, not a small molecule as depicted in your image. The Drugbank database, for example, describes eflapegrastim as "a form of recombinant human G-CSF comprising a human G-CSF analog coupled to the Fc fragment of human IgG4 via a polyethylene glycol linker" ( Innerstream (talk) 21:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Innerstream: That's from the SMILES on Wikidata (and same as InChI key) for eflapegrastim (Q30314101) (see also (2S)-1-[3-[2-[3-[[(1S,2R)-1-carboxy-2-hydroxypropyl]amino]propoxy]ethoxy]propyl]pyrrolidine-2-carboxylic acid (Q76801920)), which has the correct CASNo. But looking at the drug refs, this is clearly wrong. SciFinder has no structure for the name, and no entry for that structure I drew. Easy enough for me to nuke the image. What is to be done with wikidata? DMacks (talk) 01:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It looks like incorrect data got attached to the Wikidata item for eflapegrastim. I don't edit there much, but it seems like the best thing to do is to simply remove conflicting data from the entry, so I have done so. Innerstream (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This painting is obviously PD-art so you shouldn't have tagged it. Please be more careful when putting semi-speedy deletion templates on files. Multichill (talk) 17:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no information about who painted it or when. And I still don't. I see who uploaded it (who is reasonably the photographer, and who has reasonably made a release of their level of contribution to the uploaded file) and who the person is in the painting (irrelevant in this case unless we know it was a live-done portrait). I see where the photograph was taken, and can infer that it is a museum, but our FOP-Germany explicitly excludes museums. I assume you know who the painter is or when it was painted, so please add that information to the image description page so that others are able to verify that it meets the claimed licensing. DMacks (talk) 17:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]