Talk:20alpha-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
20alpha hydroxysteriod dehydrogenase is AKR1C1
editThe paper by Strickler et al. obviously has some flaws. It missed the AKR1C1 as a HSD20A. There is confusion in old an new literature whether HSD20A is a HSD17B2 enzyme or not. If you look into the Strickler paper you will note that the HSD20A activity is only a by-product. The AKR1C1 has a low and therefore significant Km of 0.6 µM which is the lowest of all substances mentioned in the pubmed protein entry Q04828.1. This should be stressed. --B.Kleine (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Requested move 18 July 2017
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: no consensus - stale discussion DrStrauss talk 09:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
20alpha-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase → 20α-Hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase – Proper styling and to match other steroid-metabolizing enzyme names (e.g., 5α-reductase). Medgirl131 21:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. Winged Blades Godric 11:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. DrStrauss talk 17:31, 9 August 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran(talk) 03:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- This is a contested technical request (permalink). — Amakuru (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - the 5α-reductase case was also requested at WP:RMTR by Medgirl131, and was moved there in October 2016 after 12 years at the old name, so its debatable whether it establishes a precedent or not. I think this should probably be more thoroughly discussed before going further. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Amakuru. Amakuru, is it possible that you could change the status of this "non-controversial" to "under discussion"? Some other page-mover or sys-op might move it directly. This is listed at WP:RM#TR, thats how I found this in first place. (kindly ping me when replying.) —usernamekiran(talk) 22:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hi @Usernamekiran: it shouldn't still be listed at WP:RMTR - I cleared it from there about 20 mins ago. It's possible it lingered on the parent WP:RM page a little longer until the cache cleared, but seems to be gone now. Have you refreshed your page? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: Yup, it was the cache issue. It has left the WP:RM without even purging the server cache. :) —usernamekiran(talk) 22:33, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hi @Usernamekiran: it shouldn't still be listed at WP:RMTR - I cleared it from there about 20 mins ago. It's possible it lingered on the parent WP:RM page a little longer until the cache cleared, but seems to be gone now. Have you refreshed your page? Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Amakuru. Amakuru, is it possible that you could change the status of this "non-controversial" to "under discussion"? Some other page-mover or sys-op might move it directly. This is listed at WP:RM#TR, thats how I found this in first place. (kindly ping me when replying.) —usernamekiran(talk) 22:24, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.