User talk:Vaccinationist

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

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 07:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there[edit]

Just a quick thank you for the great work you've been doing from a fellow structure fanatic. Keep it up! Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks so much! :D Vaccinationist (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Margin[edit]

Example

Hi Vaccinationist. Thank you for uploading so many structural formulas. I'd suggest you to add a small margin. The reason may be seen in the example structure on the right: It sticks too much to the frame. --Leyo 23:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, I’ll keep that in mind. Vaccinationist (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
bahasa melayu  català  čeština  dansk  deutsch (Sie-Form)  deutsch  english  español  français  galego  hrvatski  italiano  magyar  nederlands  norsk  norsk bokmål  norsk nynorsk  português  polski  português do Brasil  română  sicilianu  slovenčina  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)  български  македонски  русский  українська  ಕನ್ನಡ  ತುಳು  മലയാളം  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  עברית  العربيَّة  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Travoprost structure.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it. If you have any questions please contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 16:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 R2 Announcement[edit]

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open![edit]

2012 Picture of the Year: A pair of European Bee-eaters in Ariège, France.

Dear Wikimedians,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction/en Click here to learn more and vote »]

Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

This Picture of the Year vote notification was delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results Announcement[edit]

Picture of the Year 2013 Results[edit]

The 2013 Picture of the Year. View all results »

Dear Vaccinationist,

The 2013 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to announce the results: We shattered participation records this year — more people voted in Picture of the Year 2013 than ever before. In both rounds, 4070 different people voted for their favorite images. Additionally, there were more image candidates (featured pictures) in the contest than ever before (962 images total).

  • In the first round, 2852 people voted for all 962 files
  • In the second round, 2919 people voted for the 50 finalists (the top 30 overall and top 2 in each category)

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these beautiful images and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1. 157 people voted for the winner, an image of a lightbulb with the tungsten filament smoking and burning.
  2. In second place, 155 people voted for an image of "Sviati Hory" (Holy Mountains) National Park in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine.
  3. In third place, 131 people voted for an image of a swallow flying and drinking.

Click here to view the top images »

We also sincerely thank to all 4070 voters for participating and we hope you will return for next year's contest in early 2015. We invite you to continue to participate in the Commons community by sharing your work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year committee

You are receiving this message because you voted in the 2013 Picture of the Year contest.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Vaccinationist. Could you please upload your version under a new file name? It's good to have a choice. --Leyo 20:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Terminal groups[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. Please do not overwrite structures containing explicit terminal –CH3 (or =CH2 or ≡CH) by a new version without. In de.wikipedia, the former version is the preferred one. --Leyo 22:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which files are affected? I can undo my structures at any time. --Vaccinationist (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just consider this request for your future (valuable) work. If you find more low quality structures containing explicit terminal groups, either upload your version under a new name or upload a better version under the existing name, but with the same style concerning the terminal groups. --Leyo 23:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clorotepine.svg[edit]

I noticed that you uploaded a new version of this image in which it was flipped vertically. It's not a big deal, but in general I think it is a good idea to upload different representations of the same chemical as different files. I assume you are doing this to make images of related drugs appear similarly across related articles on English Wikipedia, but since the images may be used on other language Wikipedias, you may be making other uses become inconsistent. Two separate representations as two separate files leaves options for everyone. In any case, thanks for all the work you are doing improving drug articles. Regards, Ed (Edgar181) 17:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fluphenazine[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. I noticed that during editing image of fluphenazine structure you have altered chemical structure of that drug (carbonyl bridge instead of methylene). 87.207.233.227 19:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for noticing! I'll correct it asap. :3 --Vaccinationist (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Vaccinationist. Please see number 2. As your request violated the guideline, I moved the file back to the original correct (German) name. Unfortunately, Wieralee blindly trusted you. --Leyo 20:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Query of two structures[edit]

I may be a chemist, but I'm not a sugar expert! However, someone altered en:L-Glucose caption from alpha to beta. I did revert it as it does not agree with your image File:Haworth projection of α-L-Glucopyranose.svg. However since then I've been trying to check - and I found at http://www.edinformatics.com/interactive_molecules/a_b_glucose_differences.htm the folloing

When a glucopyranose molecule is drawn in the Haworth projection, the designation 'a-' means that the hydroxyl group attached to C-1 and the -CH2OH group at C-5 lies on opposite sides of the ring's plane (a trans arrangement), while 'ß-' means that they are on the same side of the plane (a cis arrangement)

. In would appear that in your drawing that the CH2OH on 5 and the OH on 1 are both down, thus suggesting beta. Note this also affects File:Haworth projection of α-D- and α-L-Glucopyranose.svg. I can rename them if they are incorrect. Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clorotepine[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. I noticed that during editing image of clorotepine you have altered structure of that drug (chlorine atom in meta position instead of para, relative to sulfur). 193.242.142.131 22:18, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for catching that. I've uploaded a new, correct version. --Vaccinationist (talk) 22:55, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The factual accuracy of the chemical structure File:Telinavir structure.svg is disputed[edit]

Dispute notification The chemical structure File:Telinavir structure.svg you uploaded has been tagged as disputed and is now listed in Category:Disputed chemical diagrams. Files in this category are deleted after one month if there is no upload of a corrected version and if there is no objection from the uploader or other users. Please discuss on the file talk page if you feel that the dispute is inappropriate. If you agree with the dispute, you can either upload a corrected version or simply allow the file to be deleted.

In all cases, please do not take the dispute personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! --Rhadamante (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Category discussion warning

Serotonin-norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitors has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Elbasvir structure[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. I noticed an error in the structure you have for Elbasvir that crept in on one of your revisions. The nitrogens on the imidzole rings were changed. The pyrrolidine should be in the 2-position of imidazole. Core at the 4-position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiroloco980 (talk • contribs) 07:42, 24 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bromazolam[edit]

Hello,

just saw your bromazolam drawing.... do you follow rcs like me or just like to guess benzo structures?

Cheers!

2A00:EE2:600:900:428D:5CFF:FE24:E8C0 09:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the graphics, but when you updated File:Cimetidine.svg in early 2016, you changed the guanidine group to a configuration that doesn't actually occur. The original by User:Harbin had the cyanide group on the double-bonded nitrogen, but your edit swapped it and the methyl. This tautomer is not actually observed.

A detailed study of cimetidine tautomers can be found in “Thermally induced solid-state transformation of cimetidine. A multi-spectroscopic/chemometrics determination of the kinetics of the process and structural elucidation of one of the products as a stable N3-enamino tautomer”, in Analytica Chimica Acta, volume 875, 22 May 2015, DOI:10.1016/j.aca.2015.02.033, PMID 25937103, pages 22-32, and the form in the current structural diagram does not occur.

Additional discussion at en:Talk:Cimetidine#Structural formula and en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Error in structural formula for Cimetidine; how to fix?.

Would you be able to update the diagram? 104.153.72.218 17:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for catching this up. I have redrawn the structure. --Vaccinationist (talk) 10:48, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Omeprazole[edit]

Please see the recent comment regarding a structure error at en:Talk:Omeprazole. I agree the ring structures are wrong and need correction. Jrfw51 (talk) 11:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Eszopiclone ball-and-stick model.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

DMacks (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The factual accuracy of the chemical structure File:Omeprazole enantiomers.svg is disputed[edit]

Dispute notification The chemical structure File:Omeprazole enantiomers.svg you uploaded has been tagged as disputed and is now listed in Category:Disputed chemical diagrams. Files in this category are deleted after one month if there is no upload of a corrected version and if there is no objection from the uploader or other users. Please discuss on the file talk page if you feel that the dispute is inappropriate. If you agree with the dispute, you can either upload a corrected version or simply allow the file to be deleted.

In all cases, please do not take the dispute personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you! --Ed (Edgar181) 15:43, 17 July 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Proglumide.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

JuTa 09:21, 12 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why do you keep replacing my structures?[edit]

I do not see why you keep replacing my structures. If there is a problem, say, but otherwise leave them as is. When I add "2DCSD" or "2DACS" to the name of a file that means it was made in MarvinSketch or ChemSketch, respectively, and is in 2D. I suspect you're using a different piece of software (like ChemDoodle), which is turning their filenames into a lie. Brenton (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Rolapitant.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

DMacks (talk) 03:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Apatinib.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

DMacks (talk) 04:17, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category discussion warning

Amphetamine enantiomers has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!


Wostr (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Vaccinationist, you edited File:Empagliflozin.svg some years ago. Another user (not me) on a non-English Wikipedia noticed that the file shows the oxolan ring on the right in (R)-configuration, while the IUPAC name refers to "[...](3S)-oxolan-3-yl[...]" and indeed all chemical databases (CAS, ChemSpider, Kegg, PubChem etc.) show the ring in (S)-configuration. I think he ring got flipped (probably accidentally) when you "facelifted" the original file. To show the (S)-configuration, either the oxygen would have to move one position clockwise or the bond connecting the ring to the rest of the molecule would have to be dashed instead of wedged. Could you check and , if correct, fix that? Thank you! --Shinryuu (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mubritinib 2.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Innerstream (talk) 22:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Avenasterol structure.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Marbletan (talk) 15:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank You[edit]

I've spent hundreds of hours staring at your structures and simultaneously thinking of alterations to these structures in order to think of new ligands. I have a great deal of respect for the amount of time and dedication you've put into uploading chemical structures over the years. Your contributions are important; thank you again. --7-hydroxymitragynine 08:17, 25 March 2023‎

Thank you very much. Your gratitude means a lot to me. My dream is to bring all the structural formulas on Wikipedia to a single, unified appearance so that anyone can see the similarities and differences in the substituents of related structural formulas of, say, benzodiazepines, beta-blockers, or steroids. Vaccinationist (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unclear bonding[edit]

In:

you have a bond to an implicit methyl that to an untrained eye looks nearly indistinguishable from a bond to a fluorine atom. A simple change of conformation could resolve it, such as in File:GS-CA1.png. While looking at layout options, I see your revision to Lenacapavir is noted "correct representation of wedged ring part". Could you explain what that means? DMacks (talk) 04:36, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your question. In the three-membered heterocycle there is a part where there were (in the case of lenacapavir) two wedged bonds going to the same atom, which is not recommended by the IUPAC structural formulae display rules. This part was redrawn and two hydrogen atoms with hashed bonds were added. The GS-CA1 molecule was drawn accordingly. I've redrawn both formulae to avoid ambiguity. Vaccinationist (talk) 09:28, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:WAY-267,464.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Marbletan (talk) 18:26, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sulfone.svg[edit]

Thanks for all your great chemical structure images. Can I make a request regarding File:Sulfone.svg? I know it's a minor issue, but can you change the apostrophe () to prime (), which is the standard symbol used in these situations? Thanks. Marbletan (talk) 19:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Of course. Done. Vaccinationist (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:DL-Fructose num.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Alhadis (talk) 00:54, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MK-9470.svg[edit]

Dear Vaccinationist, Can you please correct the structure of MK-9470 on its page? Because a fluorine atom is missing. Please see the link at the CAS number or the linked article there. Thank you! Nuke (talk) 13:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good afternoon. Thank you for your comment. I have corrected the structure. Probably ChemSpider and PubChem links should now be corrected as they lead to the unlabeled MK-9470, as well as the title of the article. Vaccinationist (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
I have no control over this - it's all Nabilone's fault! Haha - Thanks for keeping the models up to par! Oldfart404 (talk) 08:51, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Orforglipron.svg[edit]

Hi Vaccinationist. An IP on enwiki has disputed the accuracy of one of your images, File:Orforglipron.svg. Can you have a look? Thanks. Marbletan (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your observation. Unfortunately, mistakes in drawing such complex structures do occur from time to time. I have just corrected them. I'd be thankful if you check it out. Vaccinationist (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It looks good to me. Thank you! I've added it back into the article. Marbletan (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, could you take a look at this discussion page? Thanks, Wostr (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the comment, the made error has been corrected. Vaccinationist (talk) 11:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]