Welcome to hypercone.com on July 6 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

User talk:Vuo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  (Redirected from User:Vuo)
Jump to: navigation, search


Quick links

I'm a Finnish guy, with a M.Sc. Tech. in chemical technology.

[edit] source request

hello. could you provide a source for your statement on the Talk:Fluoride poisoning talk page that "the toxicity of organofluorines is entirely compound-dependent and not related to fluoride release." (italics added)? I am not sure that your assertion is correct, due to methoxyflurane page, (and fuzzy memories), but I would like to learn more in case you are right. Thanks. -Shootbamboo (talk) 21:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] subst:

Just a heads-up: when placing warning/information templates on user talk pages, always remember to subst the template. See WP:TM/UTN for more info. Thanks! haz (talk) 21:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Teboil

Hi, Vuo. You started article about Teboil last summer. Therefore, I would like to ask your comment about some issues listed at the talk page of this article. Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 19:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Werner Wanker

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Werner Wanker, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability. If it were not for the name, would this be here?

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Scott Mac (Doc) 16:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Jasenovac concentration camp

Your edit was quite correct - the reference used (here) states "sulphur dioxide", not "suphur monoxide". I've updated the article accordingly (and removed your tag). Thanks for noticing this.

Cheers, This flag once was redpropagandadeeds 11:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Condescension

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Condescension, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Not worth an encyclopedia article, transwiki to Wiktionary and revert this to the redirect it was previously

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. PamD (talk) 00:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A deletion review discussion you may wish to contribute to.

Hi. I've listed two deleted articles at Wikipedia:Deletion_review, following the discussion on "lists of unusual things" which took place earlier in the year. As a contributor to that discussion, you might be interested in expressing an opinion on whether the two deleted articles should be restored. SP-KP (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] why add "during their lifetimes" (health effects of tobacco article)

I like your first clarification ("at the level of the individual") but I don't understand why you thought to add "during their lifetimes" to the sentence "For example, smoking tobacco is known to cause cancer in humans, but not all people who smoke necessarily develop smoking-related cancer during their lifetimes." -- as opposed to what, after their lifetimes? :)

Also, I'm not sure what to do about it but the sentence in the article "of which men are more likely to smoke than women, however the gender gap declines with age, poor more likely than rich, and people of developing countries than those of developed countries". I don't think it sounds very grammatical the way it reads now... do you have a better suggestion?

79.122.9.209 (talk) 12:38, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The lifetime of a tobacco smoker is shorter than that of a non-smoker. All of this difference is not because of excess incidence of cancer. That's why it's important to add the qualifier "during their lifetimes". --Vuo (talk) 12:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
your explanation sounds like you're now saying: "not all people who smoke necessarily develop smoking-related cancer during their lifetimes (which, however, are shorter than non-smokers for reasons other than cancer incidence)"... is this right? If that's what you mean, I'm afraid I still don't quite understand your point... 94.27.216.65 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC).
I don't have the epidemiological data here, but as I remember it, most people who die from tobacco smoking don't die from cancer. We don't want to give the idea that tobacco smoking is safe EXCEPT for cancer, because that is simply not true. Rather, cancer kills only those that are alive after being exposed to other risks such as excess physiological stress that causes cardiovascular disease. Normal people (non-smokers) are not exposed to the same amount of cardiovascular disease-causing physiological stress as smokers, and live longer. --Vuo (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Tobacco

Hi! Would you be interested in helping to establish a WikiProject covering all aspects of tobacco? If so, please sign up here - cheers! bd2412 T 06:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RFC Health effects of tobacco

An RFC is being conducted at Talk:Health effects of tobacco, I thought you might be interested. 04:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools

Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs