E.Thorsos

Welcome!

A cup of warm tea to welcome you!

Hello, E.Thorsos, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
---> From DocTree, December 13, 2013

Flame Retardants

Copied from previous user account EThorsos:
I agree and folded it back in. In vitro human only showns mechanisms as the in vivo study supports an adverse health effect. Therefore, I worded the section where the in vitro study supports the in vivo study, as the in vivo study was performed first, showed deiodinase disruption, and was linked to hypothyroidism (decreased serum levels of T4). The in vitro human assay did not measure any phenotypic or disease endpoint (simply mechanistic). Alone, I feel there is not much confidence in the data. However, with the in vivo study (and having the in vitro study supporting the in vivo...that actually is good from a weight of evidence point of view. Good catch and thank you for contacting me. Does this sound good to you?
---> From HHSHHSHHS, 30 April 2013‎

Chlorpyrifos and WP:MEDRS

First of all, thanks for contributing to a topical article. A lot of work and to the benefit of many potential readers. My concern is that at least some of the comments and claims in the new content are of a medical nature. My understanding is that Wikipedia has a particularly high standard with regards to such content per WP:MEDRS. This guideline pushes us editors to rely on secondary sources (which should be the core of references anyway per WP:SECONDARY). Thus, I am worried about some of the new references that you contributed to this article. --Smokefoot (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

For this reason, I removed some papers by Rauh et al. They do not appear to meet Wikipedia standards. There are probably others. The research and review literature on this compound is especially vast, so literature must be selected in some non-biased and somewhat systematic way, which I would be glad to discuss.--Smokefoot (talk) 13:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance, feedback, and offer to discuss more. I'll make a first pass addressing the content and sources you have highlighted, and I'll get back in touch if it seems appropriate.--E.Thorsos (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. It is always worrisome how someone will respond to seeing their hard work cut up or critiqued. Indicates that you have a good future here. I will leave some promising sources on the Chlorpyrifos talk page. With very best wishes. --Smokefoot (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Your first note to me was very diplomatic! I have just modified the section about potential health effects from exposure early in life, but I have not yet re-addressed the subsequent sections of the article. --E.Thorsos (talk) 18:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Reference errors on 24 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon page, your edit caused an ISSN error (help), an ISBN error (help) and a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Radical, Diesel and Urban. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 9 March 2016 (UTC)