User talk:Glycoform

Welcome!

Hello, Glycoform, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Arcadian (talk) 18:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glycoprotein

This edit summary was inaccurate and rude especially when you kept part of the edit. Please assume good faith at the same time as using the undo button lest others stop assuming your good faith. Zab (talk) 02:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see, so deleting a valid reference with no rationale is a justified edit? I stand by the change, there was no reason to remove the citation or the sentance, esp. considering the original was accurate. I kept the only valid part of the change, which was to point out the related articles within the intro. You should provide justification for a deletion like the one you made, and there is none as far as I see. There is nothing rude about preserving useful components of an article.--Glycoform (talk) 02:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I see what I deleted now, but I did not intend to do that. I was attempting to move a sentence; the only thing I deleted (by mistake) was the reference. Sorry to waste your talk page space. Zab (talk) 03:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Blotting

Do not try to modify Eastern Blotting. The Japanese papers mentioning Eastern blotting are Far Eastern Blotting. Do not insert lectin blotting or any other fancy names as it is confusing to the reader. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.118.175 (talk) 03:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No - lectin blotting is eastern blotting; and it was not invented in the '90s, but in the late '70s. The terms used in the updated version of that article are correct, and I've restored them. If you would care to update the article to clarify differences between these two terms, feel free - but do not just delete properly referenced text. This discussion belongs on the talk page of the article, and not on this user page. Please direct any comments there. --Glycoform (talk) 13:35, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant passage is on Eastern Blotting and not Lectin blotting. This is not about lectin blotting, if you need your own page create it. Do not try to vandalise other pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.109.98.97 (talk) 14:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Please do not vandalise the section of Eastern Blotting. I suggest you create new pages if you are interested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.109.98.97 (talk) 14:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again - this discussion belongs on the talk page of the article - not here, and I'll paste the discussion there. But I have yet to hear an actual argument for the difference between an eastern blot and a lectin blot. Although, though perhaps your issue is that not all eastern blots are lectin blots, my point would be that all lectin blots are eastern blots. --Glycoform (talk) 14:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sialic Acid

Is it possible for you to modify the .png with the carbon-numbering on it on the above page. Someone has pointed out that the ring oxygen is missing. You may have omitted it for clarity perhaps. But it would be nice if the correct structure was dsiplayed. TIA Ianmc (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting your edits to Avatar (2009 film)

Hi Glycoform. I had to revert your recent edits in Avatar (2009 film) for reasons already explained to you exhaustively on the talk page of that article. Please do not suspect any personal prejudice -- there is none. I hope this won't discourage you from further participation in the article. Thanks and regards, Cinosaur (talk) 19:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Glycoform. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Glycoform. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]