This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 19 |
I propose to add subheader Legal status for the legal data (one data block). Today, it is under 'Clinical data' which is not quite correct. Comments? - DePiep ( talk) 00:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
@ DePiep: Hey, would you be willing to create a tracking category for pages that use the INN parameter? I think it'd be useful to have a continuously updated list of drug articles which have a page title that differs from the drug's INN (provided that it has one). Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 09:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I think that the investigational name should have a field in the Infobox.
Many drug articles have the investigational name in the introduction. I can't imagine anyone using the investigational name unless they were doing a bibliographic search into the history of the drug. It clutters up the introduction and would be better placed in the Infobox.
Agree? Disagree? -- Nbauman ( talk) 15:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonym=
field?
Sizeofint (
talk)
17:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)|synonyms=
without further ado (no separate data row though). BTW, what is the link for a definition of the 'investigational name' (onwiki, offwiki)? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
. This serves everyone and everything. Please explain why this is not OK in this name situation.|synonyms=..., LSD-25, ...
does not link anything. What cluttering? It just adds a serious name to the infobox -- OK with me. Aren't you mistaking *external links* for wikipedia facts? -
DePiep (
talk)
00:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=..., LSD-25, ...
- only the common ones or the ones they think are relevant will likely be entered. Just be aware that the number of synonyms for other drugs can be very large [spanning investigational names, trade names, chemical names, etc] - hence potential for cluttering - especially when synonyms are already represented in authoratative links contained within the Infobox.
Mangofast (
talk)
01:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
The infobox uses parameters |StdInChI=
and |StdInChIKey=
for InChI data. These parameters are also tracked by the verification bot.
Probably from history, some 4000 articles also have parameters added |InChI=
, |InChIKey=
. But these are not used at all (not shown). I am preparing to mass-remove parameters InChI, InChIKey, controlled. The first batch will remove: those that are blank or that repeat the already present StdInChI, StdInChIKey values. (That is, the same
InChI-wise so e.g. the prefixes 1/ - 1S/ may differ for the same substance). In this batch, no information will be lost.
|InChI=
instead of our construction |StdInChI=
, but today the verifying bot only knows the Std one and this cannot be changed simply overall. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)I would just like to compliment and thank whoever shepherded the "_comment" parameters into creation and use. For 99% of WP readers, it is much more useful in the infobox to read "Pregnancy category: US: C (Risk not ruled out) (no adequate human studies)"—which clearly and briefly explains exactly what C means and the reason why—than it is to read just "Pregnancy category: US: C", which would leave the user to go hunt elsewhere for what C meant (and most likely to make assumptions about why). Someone was really using their brain. Nice to see. Quercus solaris ( talk) 01:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
In {{ Chembox}}, we show a Jmol link (to an interactive 3D model). By default, it is created from the existant SMILES input data. Should we show that here too? (Looks like this is of chemical interest only, not clinically). Crude demo for MDMA:
|SMILES=CC(NC)CC1=CC=C(OCO2)C2=C1
→
Jmol:- DePiep ( talk) 10:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Parameter Tolerance is not in the template. M-G ( talk · contribs) ca. 08:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
l mean adaption — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-G ( talk • contribs) 22:20, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
add parameter usable period — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-G ( talk • contribs) 12:16 am, 11 April 2016 (UTC+2)
Would it be possible to add the drug's class (category) to this template? For example, antidepressant, antihypertensive, beta blocker. As a pharmacy student, I think it would be very helpful to be able to look in the same spot on each drug's article and quickly find its class. Lmp883 ( talk) 23:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
|FDA_class=
must be from
[2], and |PubMed_class=
must be from
[3]. This way, reducing mentioning of unsourced classes.|type=
that apparently is only used for biopharmaceuticals. Adding |therapeutic class=
or something similar might be appropriate.
Boghog (
talk)
18:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)|class=
(like
legal_status has).|class=antidepressant
will see
Antidepressant. -
DePiep (
talk)
19:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but: What are people's thoughts on adding "street names" (alternatively, "slang terms," "nicknames," "other names," "common slang terms") to the template? I could the see the potential for unsourced additions, but, if properly sourced, I think street names could be a helpful addition to the infobox template, especially considering that, in many cases, these names are more frequently used than the clinical, pharmaceutical, or INN names. Furthermore, it would only really apply to those drugs that are used recreationally enough to have developed street names, so it wouldn't even be an intrusive addition in most cases. Madreterra ( talk) 19:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I do not find that the clarification of pregnancy to pregnancy category is required and that it is implied by common sense in the same way that WP:The sky is blue… I have shortened it in this infobox, together with a number of other parameters that seem equally non-contentious. The infobox is ridiculously long and we need to shorten it — for starters this can be done by removing excess text that serves no purpose. What do you think Doc James? Carl Fredik 💌 📧 10:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
If you haven't read about it yet, check out Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Do we want to add a field for it in the legal_UK section? Aethyta ( talk) 14:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
|legal_UK=
with this option? -
DePiep (
talk)
17:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
GSL, P, POM, CD, CD specified
. We could add option |legal_UK=psychoactive
to show like
Pshychoactive Subst Act. As said, the Misuse act and Psychoactive Act are mutually exclusive (a drug van be in one list only), so no new parameter is needed. -
DePiep (
talk)
08:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)Category:Drugs that are a combination of chemicals is a relatively new category that is populated by the drugbox when type=combo. But we still have Category:Combination drugs (plus subcategories) which is filled manually. Seems pretty much redundant – what do others think? -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 13:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Currently, the drugs template does not provide readers with critical information about the range of effective doses, the range of toxic or lethal doses, and the therapeutic or safety index.
I propose that the template add the following fields as mandatory (i.e. they will show up as blank, with a message requesting that they be filled in).
The fields should accept "unknown" or "inapplicable", with appropriate display. (E.g. "LD50: unknown".) Inf should also be accepted, e.g. for the LD50 of LSD in humans, if the drug has been studied / used enough that no known number indicates that there is no such number, rather than just a lack of adequate information.
For all of the above, there should be a mandatory parameter indicating the animal model from which the measurement is derived, with "human" suppressed by default (to be enabled e.g. if the drug is not intended for human use).
The template should handle the existence of multiple animal models, e.g. if there are separate known LD50 (mouse) and LD50 (human). If multiple models exist, un-suppress "human" label, and put it first.
There should be an optional parameter for ref-name(s) on each number to indicate citation source. (A full inline ref would be cumbersome; it can be added at the bottom of the infobox.) Finally, there should be an optional parameter for conditional situations — for instance, LD50 or ED50 of drugs taken together with the ED50 of an MAOI, when administered to children, etc, if separate numbers are available. Sai ¿? ✍ 11:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
appears to be slightly buggy, the short form | C=20 | H=21 | D=4 | N=1 | O=4 results in an unknown parameter name error (it refuses to take the D) and won't calculate the molar mass either, however the old | chemical_formula = C20H21D4NO4 works (although mass isn't calculated here either). Not exactly common (I think there're only articles for Beta-D, 4-D and 6β-Naltrexol-d4), but nonetheless it's a small bug that shouldn't be hard to fix. Aethyta ( talk) 00:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
|D=
does not exist.
Deuterium is an isotope of H. Shouldn't that be written 2H? So: C20H212H4NO4? -
DePiep (
talk)
09:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
|D=
should probably exist, as it's far more commonly used than 2H. For example, ChemIDplus lists the formula of
deuterium oxide (heavy water) as D2O.
Aethyta (
talk)
01:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the motivation for doing this is, but I don't think this is an improvement for most drug articles on small molecules. This formatting looks awkward/ugly in the drugbox. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 14:46, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
To reiterate:
Restatement of arguments in favor of restoring the ASHP link
|
---|
|
Boghog ( talk) 22:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
does not help any clarification to add that info– WP:V
there is no need to add that info– if the ASHP wikilink is not added, then the drugs.com external link should be deleted entirely
no misunderstandings– others have already commented that this site appears spammy and have suggested its removal, removing the explanatory wiki link removes the justification for including the external link
Re DePiep: Next time, please ask if there is consensus before making a potentially controversial change to this template. You first removed the link, and then didn't ask, but announced that you had removed the link. This is backwards. Also you are confusing silence with consensus. You didn't ask if there was consensus and no one specifically commented on the removal of the AHSF link until Doc James' comment above. Boghog ( talk) 06:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
labeling each and every drugs.com el ASHP is dead wrong. The slash in " ASHP/ Drugs.com" means " and/or" so how can this be "dead wrong"? Boghog ( talk) 06:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
For mab drugs, we can use |source=
to add the mab_type like e, i, o, u, zu. (see
documentation). Now
Tyranitar Man recently added option source=vet
option to show source =
Veterinary medicine
[9]. However, to me this looks like a mistake ("source" is not meaning "where does it come from"; and vet is not listed in the
list). Can people comfirm/deny that |source=vet
is correctly added for mab? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=
, it's a |mab_type=
. However, I don't know what Tyranitar Man intended, and "veterinary" doesn't fit the function of the |source=
parameter, which is for describing the species from which the peptide sequence comes. --
ἀνυπόδητος (
talk)
18:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=vet
. -
DePiep (
talk)
13:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=vet
. -
DePiep (
talk)
00:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)I couldn't find anyplace in the template to put a developmental name. Many of the WP entries start out by giving the developmental name in the narrative summary (e.g. "(trade name Yervoy, formerly known as MDX-010[1] and MDX-101)". This seems like a waste of a prime location in the article. The introduction is supposed to help readers understand the rest of the entry, but the developmental name doesn't help. The few people who will actually need to know the developmental name can find it as easily if it's in the infobox. Is there some way to include the developmental name in the infobox? If not, do people agree that it would be a good addition to the infobox? -- Nbauman ( talk) 15:41, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|tradename=
or |synonyms=
? Retroactively changing that for thousands of articles and enforcing it in future ones is very unrealistic though. Also not worth the effort. Besides, many drugs don't have a INN, which means that their trade/brand/development names are the only available options. For example,
Rapastinel was titled
GLYX-13 for many years - the development name is certainly worth keeping here. If the names in your example above however are not really used in the references, you could always remove them on a case-by-case basis (remember to create redirects!) or discuss it on the articles talk page first. But there's no blanket solution that applies to all articles.
Aethyta (
talk)
18:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
but not |tradename=
would be an appropriate parameter to also store the developmental name.
Boghog (
talk)
19:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
not a |tradename=
. We can add |developmental name=
to the input list, and show it listed together with the synonyms. Once irrelevant, it should be removed from the infobox though. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:32, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
About Dehydroepiandrosterone, also named: "DHEA". The drugbox (or the page) does not mention 'DHEA' at all. What is missing? - DePiep ( talk) 01:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Germany seems to have a well-defined categorization system for safety during pregnancy ( Pregnancy_category#Germany, although it doesn't have a ref). Since we've added the German legal status why not add the pregnancy categorization as well? Sizeofint ( talk) 23:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Same need for Australia btw, pregnancy category documentation. - DePiep ( talk) 09:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
How do others feel about creating a parameter like |density_notes=
, analogous to |melting_notes=
and |boiling_notes=
, so that it's possible to cite the density parameter? I imagine it's fairly simple to find and confirm this value for a large number of compounds, but for a minority, I think this would be a useful addition for facilitating
WP:V.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
04:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
|density_notes=
, but I don't understand the Doc in this. A 'separate box' means remove density altogether from {{Drugbox}}? -
DePiep (
talk) 23:51, 1 November 2016 (UTC) -- fix ping -
DePiep (
talk)
23:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|density_notes=
sounds fine. I think what Doc meant was to move all the
chemical data to a new infobox and this box would be placed in the
chemistry section of the drug article. I think this would create a lot of work for little gain. An alternative would be to collapse the chemical data section of the drugbox.
Boghog (
talk)
04:33, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
What the title says :-) See [10]. It's beyond my capabilities to fix this. -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 12:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
|SMILES=
input string by default.|Jmol=
can be [Nn]one
to suppress the Jmol link (does not show)|density_notes=
. Free text. Follows formatted |density=
value. Per request
#Parameter_for_citing_entries_in_the_density_parameter|synonyms=
always shows (was suppressed for |type=vaccine, combo
; could not find a reason for this). Per request
#Synonyms_not_displayed_in_drugboxes_with_type.3Dcombo.I would like to suggest adding a link to an interactive 3D model to drugbox. Obviously I don't want to touch this on my own. I believe, though, that it might be a pretty simple operation, and I am hoping that it would automatically implement on pages.
The problem has always been that not all the 3D structures of drugs are at places like PubChem or NCI/CADD. However, RCSB does have ligand models, and the idea is to use the PDB_ligand item for this. The way this would work is that an entry such as
PDB_ligand = LQQ
instead of translating to
TA1 (<a class="external text" href=" http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand=TA1">PDBe</a>, <a class="external text" href=" http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/search/smartSubquery.do?smartSearchSubtype=ChemCompIdQuery&chemCompId=TA1&polymericType=Any">RCSB PDB</a>)
would translate to something like this:
TA1 (<a class="external text" href=" http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand=TA1">PDBe</a>, <a class="external text" href=" http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/search/smartSubquery.do?smartSearchSubtype=ChemCompIdQuery&chemCompId=TA1&polymericType=Any">RCSB PDB</a>, <a class="external text" href=" https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?pdbid=TA1">Jmol</a>)
All this is doing is adding an additional link, which goes to the same page that chembox goes to currently for those pages. This link is to a page that displays a JSmol model (JavaScript/HTML5 only, not Java) based on a PDB id.
Is this possible?
EDIT: Alternatively, if one doesn't want the full capability of Jmol (VDW surfaces, charges, 3D printer models, etc.) then a simpler change could be made. The current links to EBI and RCSB are to protein searches. How about just changing those to ligand pages such as https://www3.rcsb.org/ligand/60C ? Those pages have very nice NGL models.
Hansonrstolaf ( talk) 12:12, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Right -- and that is fully operational in ChemBox (and has been for some time) -- my suggestion is that something similar be done for the drug box now. If nothing else, the PDB page needs to go to the correct ligand page. Perhaps that is sufficient. Hansonrstolaf ( talk) 22:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
1. By default, the Jmol external link is fed with the |SMILES=
input. So |Jmol=
does not need input.
2. When |Jmol=none
, the Jmol data row is suppressed (not shown).
3. When |Jmol=<some SMILES string>
, Jmol links will show that string in 3D, no matter what |SMILES=
is. (SMILES output itself is unchanged).
Comments? @
Sizeofint and
Hansonrstolaf:. Note to Hansonrstolaf: the link uses |SMILES=
input. I have not used or researched the other options you mentioned above, nor the other identifiers. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|Jmol=
in {{
Chembox}}. Long-term pet peeve of mine is structural nonsense like the Jmol link in the
ferrocene infobox.
DMacks (
talk)
04:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I have mentioned this suggestion in the Village pump (tech). If you know more, please add there. I am very low in the J/JS area. - DePiep ( talk) 23:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Category:Infobox drug articles with contradicting parameter input lists 45 drugs that have wrong input. They are a combination drug having input for a single chemical, such as a CAS registry number. Is it OK to remove that data, or should we keep and use it somehow? - DePiep ( talk) 13:51, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
|type=combo
drugs all input:|IUPAC_name= |C= |H= |F= |I= |N= |O= (etc.) |SMILES= |smiles= |chirality= |specific_rotation= |SMILES2= |smiles2= |StdInChI= |StdInChI_comment= |StdInChIKey= |StdInChI2= |density= |density_notes= |melting_point= |boiling_point= |melting_high= |boiling_high= |solubility= |sec_combustion= |molecular_weight=
This is input for a single chemical, and does not apply to the combination. Also, each of the individual drugs is mentioned and linked, and so can be reached right away for individual properties. Btw, these input values are not shown in a |type=combo
drugbox. -
DePiep (
talk)
12:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine, Acetylglycinamide chloral hydrate, Acetylsalicylic acid/dipyridamole, Acrisorcin, Activella, Adderall, Amlodipine/benazepril, Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, Ampicillin/flucloxacillin, Ampicillin/sulbactam, Arginine glutamate, Artemether/lumefantrine, Atorvastatin/amlodipine, Atovaquone/proguanil, Barbexaclone, Benzathine benzylpenicillin, Carbasalate calcium, Carbidopa/levodopa, Chlordiazepoxide/clidinium bromide, Clofezone, Co-amilozide, Co-codamol, Co-codaprin, Co-tenidone, Dichloralphenazone, Dimenhydrinate, Ezetimibe/simvastatin, Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol, Hydrocodone/paracetamol, Imipenem/cilastatin, Indacaterol/glycopyrronium bromide, Ipratropium bromide/salbutamol, Isosorbide dinitrate/hydralazine, Lamivudine/zidovudine, Lidocaine/prilocaine, Neomycin/polymyxin B/bacitracin, Oxycodone/paracetamol, Perindopril/indapamide, Piperacillin/tazobactam, Premarin, Pristinamycin, Pyridoxine/doxylamine, Quinupristin/dalfopristin, Tobramycin/dexamethasone, Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
I propose to reorder sections and data. Some demo's are in /testcases and /testcases6.
Comments? Questions? - DePiep ( talk) 21:35, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
|drug_name=
should be the INN which will displays above the structure. If an INN is available, then it is appropriate to move the IUPAC name to the chemical/physical data section.
Boghog (
talk)
09:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps move the "Synonyms entry" to the top or close to the top. I expect more reader will be interested in the synonyms than the other identifiers. Sizeofint ( talk) 06:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
. The problem is that is covers two name-types together: the parameter can list both product names and substance names (formulation and chemical). I propose to split this parameter in two. Let's create two parameters, one will show under trade names (=drug product synonyms), the other under IUPAC name (=drug substance synonyms).|nonproprietary synonyms=
, label "Synonyms" under trade names? "Also named"?|trivial names=
, label "
Trivial name" under IUPAC name. Trivial name is well-understood in chemistry. Clear enough for the drugbox-editors?|synonyms=
|synonyms=
should be split into two parameters to allow synonyms for each those two name-sets. INN-title name(s) unaffected. New parameter names and labeltexts to be decided. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)|IUPAC_name=
) - move to top of Identifiers section (fix mistake positioning it under 'Chemical data', made last week).|synonyms=
) - move to right under 'Systematic name (IUPAC)'Done - DePiep ( talk) 22:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
I propose to extract the
E number (EU additive classification) from wikidata (wd). For exceptions (when wd does not fit), the local |E_number=
can be used (overrwriting wd requires a source |E number ref=
).
The articles will be added to tracking categories, eg
|E number=
already is a {{Infobox drug}} parameter (i.e., already available in the infobox). -
DePiep (
talk)
11:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)As we know, for years both {{ Drugbox}} and {{ Chembox}} are twinned by their data rows (individual data values are treated alike). And for sure, their outer infoboxes are not. All fine so far.
I propose to add usage the central d:Wikidata data to feed the infoboxes. Not just local input any more.
Over at Talk:Chembox I proposed to "add Wikidata *external link* to the Identifiers". See you there. - DePiep ( talk)
Posting here since Template talk:Infobox drug class is pretty dead (perhaps redirect that talk page here?). The {{ Infobox drug class}} is supposed to default the title to the page name but - as seen at Opioid - it isn't doing this. If specified directly - like at anabolic steroid - it shows up as it is supposed to. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
ECHA InfoCard is an infocard publi by ECHA (EU Chemicals Authority). What is an Infocard pdf (Warning: with me, a blockingly slow pdf? DePiep). It primarily shows hazards and industrial data.
If the external link id exists in Wikidata, we can add this InfoCard automatically to the infobox. No parameter needed. For example Ketamine would have link 100.027.095.
{{Chembox}} already has this feature, and some 6000 out of 10000 articles are linked, see Category:ECHA InfoCard ID from Wikidata. Drug articles would be added too that category too. For drugs, some 2500/6500 articles would hit. To be clear, there will be no parameter for this, just an automated Wikidata reading (same as E number eg in Vitamin C).
Any remarks? Shall we add it? - DePiep ( talk) 16:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
For example, accessing http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a608053.html leads to a 301 Moved Permanently redirect for https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a608053.html which leads to another 301 Moved Permanently redirect for https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a608053.html.
In the case of NIAID ChemDB, accessing
https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953 instead of
http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953, for example, appears to work. From what it appears, accessing
http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953 (as an example) may lead to a 302 redirect to
https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov. The 302 response includes a
Strict-Transport-Security header with a value of max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
, indicating that the chemdb.niaid.nih.gov
domain supports HTTPS and that for a period of time, subsequent requests to the chemdb.niaid.nih.gov
domain and its subdomains should use HTTPS.
In the
Template:Infobox drug template, on line 97, please change http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/
to https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/
instead. On line 233, please change http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
to https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
instead, and on line 234, please change http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
to https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
15:22, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
-edited- Done. - DePiep ( talk) 00:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The purpose of this edit is to provide increased privacy and security for users by using HTTPS for the links to DrugBank. The DrugBank site
supports
HTTPS. In this template, please change http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank}}}
on line 207 to https://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank}}}
instead and change http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank2}}}
on line 208 to https://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank2}}}
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
09:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The purpose of this edit is to provide increased privacy and security for users by using HTTPS URLs for the links to the Protein Data Bank in Europe in the case of the PDB_ligand and PDB_ligand2 identifiers. In the template, please change http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand={{{PDB_ligand}}}
to https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe/entry/search/index?compound_id:{{{PDB_ligand}}}
instead and change http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand={{{PDB_ligand2}}}
to https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe/entry/search/index?compound_id:{{{PDB_ligand2}}}
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
08:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
There are numerous examples of hormone and neurotransmitters that are also drugs. Because of conflicts between WP:MCBMOS and WP:PHARMOS, several articles (as discussed here) have recently been split (see for example testosterone / testosterone (medication), oxytocin / oxytocin (medication), norepinephrine / norepinephrine (drug)). The question is what infobox should be used in the hormone/neurotransmitter specific articles. One suggestion was to use {{ Infobox neurohormone}}. However these is quite a bit of overlap between {{ Infobox neurohormone}} and {{ Infobox drug}}, hence it might be better to merge the unique field from the former into the later. Then depending on whether the infobox is in the drug or neurotransmitter article, we could suppress the display of the pharmacology or clinical section respectively. Below is a side-by-side comparison of the current drugbox (left), the proposed merged infobox (middle), and the current neurotransmitter box (right). Thoughts? Boghog ( talk) 16:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
{{ Infobox drug}} | {{ Infobox drug/sandbox4}} | {{ Infobox neurohormone}} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
An Error has occurred retrieving Wikidata item for infobox |
Some questions:
|type=<blank> (single compound)/mab/vaccine/combo/neurotransmittor
?Replies:
|type=hormone
setting. To allow checking for irregular input. -
DePiep (
talk)
21:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)Great! I don't have any objections to a |type=hormone
setting, but I would like to know what are the implications of irregular input checking and how it would be implemented. I think it is important to allow for some flexibility for special cases.
Boghog (
talk)
08:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
|type=hormone
is required to have the section Pharmacological data show (other drugbox types should not show that section). Allows us to keep
Category:Infobox drug articles with contradicting parameter input empty. (A guideline 'if not a hormone, then don't use parameters foo, bar, ...' is hard to check). Also can add a category below
Category:Drugs by type. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)@ Looie496, Jytdog, and Doc James: Do you support the merging of {{ Infobox neurohormone}} into {{ Infobox drug}}? If so, does the layout of the mockup (middle infobox above) look OK? Boghog ( talk) 08:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
To be fair, most of what goes into our infoboxes is jargon. E.g., intravenous administration is jargon for "administered into a vein", buccal administration is jargon for "administered through the mucous membranes in the mouth", rectal administration is jargon for "administered up the butt", the terms "bioavailability" and "protein binding" are jargon terms with numerical entries, and pretty much any input for the drug metabolism and metabolite parameters will contain technical terms/jargon as well.
That said, we can't forego parameters like these for a drug infobox or those parameters for a neurotransmitter infobox simply because the parameter labels or their entries are complicated or specialized topics. That kind of information (i.e., pharmacokinetic data for drugs; biosynthesis, metabolism, and biomolecular target information for biomolecules) should be contained in an infobox for each type of article (i.e., drugs and biomolecules respectively), because it's directly relevant to and allows for a succinct summary of the most important information about the topic. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
|width=
parameters. The first is in the transcluded infobox that effects the width of the image. The above discussion is not about that width, rather it is about a width parameter (|bodystyle=width:300px
) that is set within the template code itself. I set this second width parameter in an attempt to reduce the number of line breaks in the infobox headings. I now see this is more complicated since the heading width appears to be dynamically adjusted based on the length of the labels and the content. Fixing the label width to a fixed percentage of the width of the window (e.g., |labelstyle=width:33%
), might be a better option.
Boghog (
talk)
05:32, 17 December 2016 (UTC)|bodystyle=width:300px
with |labelstyle=width:42%
, this removed the line break from most but not all headings. For some reason, the label "3D Model (Jmol)" is split over two lines inspite of the fact that there looks to be plenty of room for it to be displayed on one line. Any idea why this happens?
Boghog (
talk)
05:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)We have drug class in the "combo" template. We should also have it in the singular template. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|class=
, to show right above (or below?) ATC code. Label (lefthand text):
Drug class. Let it be free text (input shown unedited). Any editing advice or restrictions beforehand? -
DePiep (
talk)
13:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|Drug_class=
in section {{Chembox Pharmacology}}. -
DePiep (
talk)
11:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)MOS:PHARM and MOS:MED currently say only to mention initial trade names in the lead (which is the consensus as far as I'm aware, and I agree), but there does not seem to be a policy for the drugbox's tradename field. Any comments on adding the same rule for this field in the drugbox documentation and/or on the MOS pages? (See [13] for a current example of the kind of IMO undesirable edit.) -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 10:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
|tradename=
in header Clinical data then. I'd support such a guideline (or described common practice), but I cannot formulate it.
this talk is from 2011. -
DePiep (
talk)
12:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
|drug_name, INN, IUPAC_name, synonyms=
, they show elsewhere in the box (because they mean something else). As I said, structurally limiting the list is good. -
DePiep (
talk)
13:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I propose to add option |PubChem=[Nn]one
, similar to |CAS number=[Nn]one
. The input will show, unlinked. Pages will be categorised by this. Would be in tandem with {{Chembox}} (
proposal).
Background: We want to crosscheck our chemicals with Wikidata. Recently, Wikidata has imported the PubChem source database, and so PubChem CID is a first candidate to check. One of the subdivisions of chemicals is "does not have a PubChem CID, so nothing to check". That is what this option "none" would add, using Category:PubChem CID tracking categories. - DePiep ( talk) 13:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
I am not familiar with PDB ligands. So I just ask.
I propose to make the following changes to the infobox. Most are background changes, and related to formatting, prepare for Wikidata comparision, and second chemical (index=2).
|PubChem=None,none
for 'not a PubChem CID assigned' (as distinct from: not entered, unknown). Categorised. See also
#earlier announcement. The word '[Nn]one' will show.|PubChemStructure=
(SID) will show when entered (was: hide when PubChem (CID) was entered).|CAS_number2=
), kept parallel with {{Chembox}} when possible:|QID=, QID2=
to make Wikidata checking easier.|index_label, index2_label, index_comment=
|x_Ref=
parameters checked.- DePiep ( talk) 15:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
The following categories have been renamed. Current pages in the old name categories are added by {{Chembox}}. {{Chembox}} will follow this renaming later on. Old category pages will be deleted when empty.
An overview of drug maintenance categories is in Category:Infobox drug tracking categories. - DePiep ( talk) 10:37, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 19 |
I propose to add subheader Legal status for the legal data (one data block). Today, it is under 'Clinical data' which is not quite correct. Comments? - DePiep ( talk) 00:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
@ DePiep: Hey, would you be willing to create a tracking category for pages that use the INN parameter? I think it'd be useful to have a continuously updated list of drug articles which have a page title that differs from the drug's INN (provided that it has one). Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 09:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I think that the investigational name should have a field in the Infobox.
Many drug articles have the investigational name in the introduction. I can't imagine anyone using the investigational name unless they were doing a bibliographic search into the history of the drug. It clutters up the introduction and would be better placed in the Infobox.
Agree? Disagree? -- Nbauman ( talk) 15:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonym=
field?
Sizeofint (
talk)
17:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)|synonyms=
without further ado (no separate data row though). BTW, what is the link for a definition of the 'investigational name' (onwiki, offwiki)? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
. This serves everyone and everything. Please explain why this is not OK in this name situation.|synonyms=..., LSD-25, ...
does not link anything. What cluttering? It just adds a serious name to the infobox -- OK with me. Aren't you mistaking *external links* for wikipedia facts? -
DePiep (
talk)
00:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=..., LSD-25, ...
- only the common ones or the ones they think are relevant will likely be entered. Just be aware that the number of synonyms for other drugs can be very large [spanning investigational names, trade names, chemical names, etc] - hence potential for cluttering - especially when synonyms are already represented in authoratative links contained within the Infobox.
Mangofast (
talk)
01:41, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
The infobox uses parameters |StdInChI=
and |StdInChIKey=
for InChI data. These parameters are also tracked by the verification bot.
Probably from history, some 4000 articles also have parameters added |InChI=
, |InChIKey=
. But these are not used at all (not shown). I am preparing to mass-remove parameters InChI, InChIKey, controlled. The first batch will remove: those that are blank or that repeat the already present StdInChI, StdInChIKey values. (That is, the same
InChI-wise so e.g. the prefixes 1/ - 1S/ may differ for the same substance). In this batch, no information will be lost.
|InChI=
instead of our construction |StdInChI=
, but today the verifying bot only knows the Std one and this cannot be changed simply overall. -
DePiep (
talk)
18:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)I would just like to compliment and thank whoever shepherded the "_comment" parameters into creation and use. For 99% of WP readers, it is much more useful in the infobox to read "Pregnancy category: US: C (Risk not ruled out) (no adequate human studies)"—which clearly and briefly explains exactly what C means and the reason why—than it is to read just "Pregnancy category: US: C", which would leave the user to go hunt elsewhere for what C meant (and most likely to make assumptions about why). Someone was really using their brain. Nice to see. Quercus solaris ( talk) 01:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
In {{ Chembox}}, we show a Jmol link (to an interactive 3D model). By default, it is created from the existant SMILES input data. Should we show that here too? (Looks like this is of chemical interest only, not clinically). Crude demo for MDMA:
|SMILES=CC(NC)CC1=CC=C(OCO2)C2=C1
→
Jmol:- DePiep ( talk) 10:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Parameter Tolerance is not in the template. M-G ( talk · contribs) ca. 08:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
l mean adaption — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-G ( talk • contribs) 22:20, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
add parameter usable period — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-G ( talk • contribs) 12:16 am, 11 April 2016 (UTC+2)
Would it be possible to add the drug's class (category) to this template? For example, antidepressant, antihypertensive, beta blocker. As a pharmacy student, I think it would be very helpful to be able to look in the same spot on each drug's article and quickly find its class. Lmp883 ( talk) 23:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
|FDA_class=
must be from
[2], and |PubMed_class=
must be from
[3]. This way, reducing mentioning of unsourced classes.|type=
that apparently is only used for biopharmaceuticals. Adding |therapeutic class=
or something similar might be appropriate.
Boghog (
talk)
18:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)|class=
(like
legal_status has).|class=antidepressant
will see
Antidepressant. -
DePiep (
talk)
19:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but: What are people's thoughts on adding "street names" (alternatively, "slang terms," "nicknames," "other names," "common slang terms") to the template? I could the see the potential for unsourced additions, but, if properly sourced, I think street names could be a helpful addition to the infobox template, especially considering that, in many cases, these names are more frequently used than the clinical, pharmaceutical, or INN names. Furthermore, it would only really apply to those drugs that are used recreationally enough to have developed street names, so it wouldn't even be an intrusive addition in most cases. Madreterra ( talk) 19:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I do not find that the clarification of pregnancy to pregnancy category is required and that it is implied by common sense in the same way that WP:The sky is blue… I have shortened it in this infobox, together with a number of other parameters that seem equally non-contentious. The infobox is ridiculously long and we need to shorten it — for starters this can be done by removing excess text that serves no purpose. What do you think Doc James? Carl Fredik 💌 📧 10:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
If you haven't read about it yet, check out Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Do we want to add a field for it in the legal_UK section? Aethyta ( talk) 14:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
|legal_UK=
with this option? -
DePiep (
talk)
17:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
GSL, P, POM, CD, CD specified
. We could add option |legal_UK=psychoactive
to show like
Pshychoactive Subst Act. As said, the Misuse act and Psychoactive Act are mutually exclusive (a drug van be in one list only), so no new parameter is needed. -
DePiep (
talk)
08:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)Category:Drugs that are a combination of chemicals is a relatively new category that is populated by the drugbox when type=combo. But we still have Category:Combination drugs (plus subcategories) which is filled manually. Seems pretty much redundant – what do others think? -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 13:37, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Currently, the drugs template does not provide readers with critical information about the range of effective doses, the range of toxic or lethal doses, and the therapeutic or safety index.
I propose that the template add the following fields as mandatory (i.e. they will show up as blank, with a message requesting that they be filled in).
The fields should accept "unknown" or "inapplicable", with appropriate display. (E.g. "LD50: unknown".) Inf should also be accepted, e.g. for the LD50 of LSD in humans, if the drug has been studied / used enough that no known number indicates that there is no such number, rather than just a lack of adequate information.
For all of the above, there should be a mandatory parameter indicating the animal model from which the measurement is derived, with "human" suppressed by default (to be enabled e.g. if the drug is not intended for human use).
The template should handle the existence of multiple animal models, e.g. if there are separate known LD50 (mouse) and LD50 (human). If multiple models exist, un-suppress "human" label, and put it first.
There should be an optional parameter for ref-name(s) on each number to indicate citation source. (A full inline ref would be cumbersome; it can be added at the bottom of the infobox.) Finally, there should be an optional parameter for conditional situations — for instance, LD50 or ED50 of drugs taken together with the ED50 of an MAOI, when administered to children, etc, if separate numbers are available. Sai ¿? ✍ 11:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
appears to be slightly buggy, the short form | C=20 | H=21 | D=4 | N=1 | O=4 results in an unknown parameter name error (it refuses to take the D) and won't calculate the molar mass either, however the old | chemical_formula = C20H21D4NO4 works (although mass isn't calculated here either). Not exactly common (I think there're only articles for Beta-D, 4-D and 6β-Naltrexol-d4), but nonetheless it's a small bug that shouldn't be hard to fix. Aethyta ( talk) 00:19, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
|D=
does not exist.
Deuterium is an isotope of H. Shouldn't that be written 2H? So: C20H212H4NO4? -
DePiep (
talk)
09:42, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
|D=
should probably exist, as it's far more commonly used than 2H. For example, ChemIDplus lists the formula of
deuterium oxide (heavy water) as D2O.
Aethyta (
talk)
01:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the motivation for doing this is, but I don't think this is an improvement for most drug articles on small molecules. This formatting looks awkward/ugly in the drugbox. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 14:46, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
To reiterate:
Restatement of arguments in favor of restoring the ASHP link
|
---|
|
Boghog ( talk) 22:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
does not help any clarification to add that info– WP:V
there is no need to add that info– if the ASHP wikilink is not added, then the drugs.com external link should be deleted entirely
no misunderstandings– others have already commented that this site appears spammy and have suggested its removal, removing the explanatory wiki link removes the justification for including the external link
Re DePiep: Next time, please ask if there is consensus before making a potentially controversial change to this template. You first removed the link, and then didn't ask, but announced that you had removed the link. This is backwards. Also you are confusing silence with consensus. You didn't ask if there was consensus and no one specifically commented on the removal of the AHSF link until Doc James' comment above. Boghog ( talk) 06:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
labeling each and every drugs.com el ASHP is dead wrong. The slash in " ASHP/ Drugs.com" means " and/or" so how can this be "dead wrong"? Boghog ( talk) 06:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
For mab drugs, we can use |source=
to add the mab_type like e, i, o, u, zu. (see
documentation). Now
Tyranitar Man recently added option source=vet
option to show source =
Veterinary medicine
[9]. However, to me this looks like a mistake ("source" is not meaning "where does it come from"; and vet is not listed in the
list). Can people comfirm/deny that |source=vet
is correctly added for mab? -
DePiep (
talk)
15:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=
, it's a |mab_type=
. However, I don't know what Tyranitar Man intended, and "veterinary" doesn't fit the function of the |source=
parameter, which is for describing the species from which the peptide sequence comes. --
ἀνυπόδητος (
talk)
18:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=vet
. -
DePiep (
talk)
13:17, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
|source=vet
. -
DePiep (
talk)
00:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)I couldn't find anyplace in the template to put a developmental name. Many of the WP entries start out by giving the developmental name in the narrative summary (e.g. "(trade name Yervoy, formerly known as MDX-010[1] and MDX-101)". This seems like a waste of a prime location in the article. The introduction is supposed to help readers understand the rest of the entry, but the developmental name doesn't help. The few people who will actually need to know the developmental name can find it as easily if it's in the infobox. Is there some way to include the developmental name in the infobox? If not, do people agree that it would be a good addition to the infobox? -- Nbauman ( talk) 15:41, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|tradename=
or |synonyms=
? Retroactively changing that for thousands of articles and enforcing it in future ones is very unrealistic though. Also not worth the effort. Besides, many drugs don't have a INN, which means that their trade/brand/development names are the only available options. For example,
Rapastinel was titled
GLYX-13 for many years - the development name is certainly worth keeping here. If the names in your example above however are not really used in the references, you could always remove them on a case-by-case basis (remember to create redirects!) or discuss it on the articles talk page first. But there's no blanket solution that applies to all articles.
Aethyta (
talk)
18:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
but not |tradename=
would be an appropriate parameter to also store the developmental name.
Boghog (
talk)
19:03, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
not a |tradename=
. We can add |developmental name=
to the input list, and show it listed together with the synonyms. Once irrelevant, it should be removed from the infobox though. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:32, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
About Dehydroepiandrosterone, also named: "DHEA". The drugbox (or the page) does not mention 'DHEA' at all. What is missing? - DePiep ( talk) 01:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Germany seems to have a well-defined categorization system for safety during pregnancy ( Pregnancy_category#Germany, although it doesn't have a ref). Since we've added the German legal status why not add the pregnancy categorization as well? Sizeofint ( talk) 23:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Same need for Australia btw, pregnancy category documentation. - DePiep ( talk) 09:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
How do others feel about creating a parameter like |density_notes=
, analogous to |melting_notes=
and |boiling_notes=
, so that it's possible to cite the density parameter? I imagine it's fairly simple to find and confirm this value for a large number of compounds, but for a minority, I think this would be a useful addition for facilitating
WP:V.
Seppi333 (
Insert 2¢)
04:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
|density_notes=
, but I don't understand the Doc in this. A 'separate box' means remove density altogether from {{Drugbox}}? -
DePiep (
talk) 23:51, 1 November 2016 (UTC) -- fix ping -
DePiep (
talk)
23:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|density_notes=
sounds fine. I think what Doc meant was to move all the
chemical data to a new infobox and this box would be placed in the
chemistry section of the drug article. I think this would create a lot of work for little gain. An alternative would be to collapse the chemical data section of the drugbox.
Boghog (
talk)
04:33, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
What the title says :-) See [10]. It's beyond my capabilities to fix this. -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 12:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
|SMILES=
input string by default.|Jmol=
can be [Nn]one
to suppress the Jmol link (does not show)|density_notes=
. Free text. Follows formatted |density=
value. Per request
#Parameter_for_citing_entries_in_the_density_parameter|synonyms=
always shows (was suppressed for |type=vaccine, combo
; could not find a reason for this). Per request
#Synonyms_not_displayed_in_drugboxes_with_type.3Dcombo.I would like to suggest adding a link to an interactive 3D model to drugbox. Obviously I don't want to touch this on my own. I believe, though, that it might be a pretty simple operation, and I am hoping that it would automatically implement on pages.
The problem has always been that not all the 3D structures of drugs are at places like PubChem or NCI/CADD. However, RCSB does have ligand models, and the idea is to use the PDB_ligand item for this. The way this would work is that an entry such as
PDB_ligand = LQQ
instead of translating to
TA1 (<a class="external text" href=" http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand=TA1">PDBe</a>, <a class="external text" href=" http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/search/smartSubquery.do?smartSearchSubtype=ChemCompIdQuery&chemCompId=TA1&polymericType=Any">RCSB PDB</a>)
would translate to something like this:
TA1 (<a class="external text" href=" http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand=TA1">PDBe</a>, <a class="external text" href=" http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/search/smartSubquery.do?smartSearchSubtype=ChemCompIdQuery&chemCompId=TA1&polymericType=Any">RCSB PDB</a>, <a class="external text" href=" https://chemapps.stolaf.edu/jmol/jmol.php?pdbid=TA1">Jmol</a>)
All this is doing is adding an additional link, which goes to the same page that chembox goes to currently for those pages. This link is to a page that displays a JSmol model (JavaScript/HTML5 only, not Java) based on a PDB id.
Is this possible?
EDIT: Alternatively, if one doesn't want the full capability of Jmol (VDW surfaces, charges, 3D printer models, etc.) then a simpler change could be made. The current links to EBI and RCSB are to protein searches. How about just changing those to ligand pages such as https://www3.rcsb.org/ligand/60C ? Those pages have very nice NGL models.
Hansonrstolaf ( talk) 12:12, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Right -- and that is fully operational in ChemBox (and has been for some time) -- my suggestion is that something similar be done for the drug box now. If nothing else, the PDB page needs to go to the correct ligand page. Perhaps that is sufficient. Hansonrstolaf ( talk) 22:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
1. By default, the Jmol external link is fed with the |SMILES=
input. So |Jmol=
does not need input.
2. When |Jmol=none
, the Jmol data row is suppressed (not shown).
3. When |Jmol=<some SMILES string>
, Jmol links will show that string in 3D, no matter what |SMILES=
is. (SMILES output itself is unchanged).
Comments? @
Sizeofint and
Hansonrstolaf:. Note to Hansonrstolaf: the link uses |SMILES=
input. I have not used or researched the other options you mentioned above, nor the other identifiers. -
DePiep (
talk)
22:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
|Jmol=
in {{
Chembox}}. Long-term pet peeve of mine is structural nonsense like the Jmol link in the
ferrocene infobox.
DMacks (
talk)
04:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I have mentioned this suggestion in the Village pump (tech). If you know more, please add there. I am very low in the J/JS area. - DePiep ( talk) 23:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Category:Infobox drug articles with contradicting parameter input lists 45 drugs that have wrong input. They are a combination drug having input for a single chemical, such as a CAS registry number. Is it OK to remove that data, or should we keep and use it somehow? - DePiep ( talk) 13:51, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
|type=combo
drugs all input:|IUPAC_name= |C= |H= |F= |I= |N= |O= (etc.) |SMILES= |smiles= |chirality= |specific_rotation= |SMILES2= |smiles2= |StdInChI= |StdInChI_comment= |StdInChIKey= |StdInChI2= |density= |density_notes= |melting_point= |boiling_point= |melting_high= |boiling_high= |solubility= |sec_combustion= |molecular_weight=
This is input for a single chemical, and does not apply to the combination. Also, each of the individual drugs is mentioned and linked, and so can be reached right away for individual properties. Btw, these input values are not shown in a |type=combo
drugbox. -
DePiep (
talk)
12:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Abacavir/lamivudine/zidovudine, Acetylglycinamide chloral hydrate, Acetylsalicylic acid/dipyridamole, Acrisorcin, Activella, Adderall, Amlodipine/benazepril, Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, Ampicillin/flucloxacillin, Ampicillin/sulbactam, Arginine glutamate, Artemether/lumefantrine, Atorvastatin/amlodipine, Atovaquone/proguanil, Barbexaclone, Benzathine benzylpenicillin, Carbasalate calcium, Carbidopa/levodopa, Chlordiazepoxide/clidinium bromide, Clofezone, Co-amilozide, Co-codamol, Co-codaprin, Co-tenidone, Dichloralphenazone, Dimenhydrinate, Ezetimibe/simvastatin, Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol, Hydrocodone/paracetamol, Imipenem/cilastatin, Indacaterol/glycopyrronium bromide, Ipratropium bromide/salbutamol, Isosorbide dinitrate/hydralazine, Lamivudine/zidovudine, Lidocaine/prilocaine, Neomycin/polymyxin B/bacitracin, Oxycodone/paracetamol, Perindopril/indapamide, Piperacillin/tazobactam, Premarin, Pristinamycin, Pyridoxine/doxylamine, Quinupristin/dalfopristin, Tobramycin/dexamethasone, Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
I propose to reorder sections and data. Some demo's are in /testcases and /testcases6.
Comments? Questions? - DePiep ( talk) 21:35, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
|drug_name=
should be the INN which will displays above the structure. If an INN is available, then it is appropriate to move the IUPAC name to the chemical/physical data section.
Boghog (
talk)
09:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps move the "Synonyms entry" to the top or close to the top. I expect more reader will be interested in the synonyms than the other identifiers. Sizeofint ( talk) 06:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
|synonyms=
. The problem is that is covers two name-types together: the parameter can list both product names and substance names (formulation and chemical). I propose to split this parameter in two. Let's create two parameters, one will show under trade names (=drug product synonyms), the other under IUPAC name (=drug substance synonyms).|nonproprietary synonyms=
, label "Synonyms" under trade names? "Also named"?|trivial names=
, label "
Trivial name" under IUPAC name. Trivial name is well-understood in chemistry. Clear enough for the drugbox-editors?|synonyms=
|synonyms=
should be split into two parameters to allow synonyms for each those two name-sets. INN-title name(s) unaffected. New parameter names and labeltexts to be decided. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)|IUPAC_name=
) - move to top of Identifiers section (fix mistake positioning it under 'Chemical data', made last week).|synonyms=
) - move to right under 'Systematic name (IUPAC)'Done - DePiep ( talk) 22:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
I propose to extract the
E number (EU additive classification) from wikidata (wd). For exceptions (when wd does not fit), the local |E_number=
can be used (overrwriting wd requires a source |E number ref=
).
The articles will be added to tracking categories, eg
|E number=
already is a {{Infobox drug}} parameter (i.e., already available in the infobox). -
DePiep (
talk)
11:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)As we know, for years both {{ Drugbox}} and {{ Chembox}} are twinned by their data rows (individual data values are treated alike). And for sure, their outer infoboxes are not. All fine so far.
I propose to add usage the central d:Wikidata data to feed the infoboxes. Not just local input any more.
Over at Talk:Chembox I proposed to "add Wikidata *external link* to the Identifiers". See you there. - DePiep ( talk)
Posting here since Template talk:Infobox drug class is pretty dead (perhaps redirect that talk page here?). The {{ Infobox drug class}} is supposed to default the title to the page name but - as seen at Opioid - it isn't doing this. If specified directly - like at anabolic steroid - it shows up as it is supposed to. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:35, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
ECHA InfoCard is an infocard publi by ECHA (EU Chemicals Authority). What is an Infocard pdf (Warning: with me, a blockingly slow pdf? DePiep). It primarily shows hazards and industrial data.
If the external link id exists in Wikidata, we can add this InfoCard automatically to the infobox. No parameter needed. For example Ketamine would have link 100.027.095.
{{Chembox}} already has this feature, and some 6000 out of 10000 articles are linked, see Category:ECHA InfoCard ID from Wikidata. Drug articles would be added too that category too. For drugs, some 2500/6500 articles would hit. To be clear, there will be no parameter for this, just an automated Wikidata reading (same as E number eg in Vitamin C).
Any remarks? Shall we add it? - DePiep ( talk) 16:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
For example, accessing http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a608053.html leads to a 301 Moved Permanently redirect for https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a608053.html which leads to another 301 Moved Permanently redirect for https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a608053.html.
In the case of NIAID ChemDB, accessing
https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953 instead of
http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953, for example, appears to work. From what it appears, accessing
http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=007953 (as an example) may lead to a 302 redirect to
https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov. The 302 response includes a
Strict-Transport-Security header with a value of max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains
, indicating that the chemdb.niaid.nih.gov
domain supports HTTPS and that for a period of time, subsequent requests to the chemdb.niaid.nih.gov
domain and its subdomains should use HTTPS.
In the
Template:Infobox drug template, on line 97, please change http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/
to https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/
instead. On line 233, please change http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
to https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
instead, and on line 234, please change http://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
to https://chemdb.niaid.nih.gov/CompoundDetails.aspx?AIDSNO=
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
15:22, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
-edited- Done. - DePiep ( talk) 00:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The purpose of this edit is to provide increased privacy and security for users by using HTTPS for the links to DrugBank. The DrugBank site
supports
HTTPS. In this template, please change http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank}}}
on line 207 to https://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank}}}
instead and change http://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank2}}}
on line 208 to https://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/{{{DrugBank2}}}
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
09:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The purpose of this edit is to provide increased privacy and security for users by using HTTPS URLs for the links to the Protein Data Bank in Europe in the case of the PDB_ligand and PDB_ligand2 identifiers. In the template, please change http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand={{{PDB_ligand}}}
to https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe/entry/search/index?compound_id:{{{PDB_ligand}}}
instead and change http://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe-srv/PDBeXplore/ligand/?ligand={{{PDB_ligand2}}}
to https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pdbe/entry/search/index?compound_id:{{{PDB_ligand2}}}
instead. Thanks. --
Elegie (
talk)
08:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
There are numerous examples of hormone and neurotransmitters that are also drugs. Because of conflicts between WP:MCBMOS and WP:PHARMOS, several articles (as discussed here) have recently been split (see for example testosterone / testosterone (medication), oxytocin / oxytocin (medication), norepinephrine / norepinephrine (drug)). The question is what infobox should be used in the hormone/neurotransmitter specific articles. One suggestion was to use {{ Infobox neurohormone}}. However these is quite a bit of overlap between {{ Infobox neurohormone}} and {{ Infobox drug}}, hence it might be better to merge the unique field from the former into the later. Then depending on whether the infobox is in the drug or neurotransmitter article, we could suppress the display of the pharmacology or clinical section respectively. Below is a side-by-side comparison of the current drugbox (left), the proposed merged infobox (middle), and the current neurotransmitter box (right). Thoughts? Boghog ( talk) 16:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
{{ Infobox drug}} | {{ Infobox drug/sandbox4}} | {{ Infobox neurohormone}} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
An Error has occurred retrieving Wikidata item for infobox |
Some questions:
|type=<blank> (single compound)/mab/vaccine/combo/neurotransmittor
?Replies:
|type=hormone
setting. To allow checking for irregular input. -
DePiep (
talk)
21:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)Great! I don't have any objections to a |type=hormone
setting, but I would like to know what are the implications of irregular input checking and how it would be implemented. I think it is important to allow for some flexibility for special cases.
Boghog (
talk)
08:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
|type=hormone
is required to have the section Pharmacological data show (other drugbox types should not show that section). Allows us to keep
Category:Infobox drug articles with contradicting parameter input empty. (A guideline 'if not a hormone, then don't use parameters foo, bar, ...' is hard to check). Also can add a category below
Category:Drugs by type. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)@ Looie496, Jytdog, and Doc James: Do you support the merging of {{ Infobox neurohormone}} into {{ Infobox drug}}? If so, does the layout of the mockup (middle infobox above) look OK? Boghog ( talk) 08:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
To be fair, most of what goes into our infoboxes is jargon. E.g., intravenous administration is jargon for "administered into a vein", buccal administration is jargon for "administered through the mucous membranes in the mouth", rectal administration is jargon for "administered up the butt", the terms "bioavailability" and "protein binding" are jargon terms with numerical entries, and pretty much any input for the drug metabolism and metabolite parameters will contain technical terms/jargon as well.
That said, we can't forego parameters like these for a drug infobox or those parameters for a neurotransmitter infobox simply because the parameter labels or their entries are complicated or specialized topics. That kind of information (i.e., pharmacokinetic data for drugs; biosynthesis, metabolism, and biomolecular target information for biomolecules) should be contained in an infobox for each type of article (i.e., drugs and biomolecules respectively), because it's directly relevant to and allows for a succinct summary of the most important information about the topic. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 00:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
|width=
parameters. The first is in the transcluded infobox that effects the width of the image. The above discussion is not about that width, rather it is about a width parameter (|bodystyle=width:300px
) that is set within the template code itself. I set this second width parameter in an attempt to reduce the number of line breaks in the infobox headings. I now see this is more complicated since the heading width appears to be dynamically adjusted based on the length of the labels and the content. Fixing the label width to a fixed percentage of the width of the window (e.g., |labelstyle=width:33%
), might be a better option.
Boghog (
talk)
05:32, 17 December 2016 (UTC)|bodystyle=width:300px
with |labelstyle=width:42%
, this removed the line break from most but not all headings. For some reason, the label "3D Model (Jmol)" is split over two lines inspite of the fact that there looks to be plenty of room for it to be displayed on one line. Any idea why this happens?
Boghog (
talk)
05:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)We have drug class in the "combo" template. We should also have it in the singular template. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|class=
, to show right above (or below?) ATC code. Label (lefthand text):
Drug class. Let it be free text (input shown unedited). Any editing advice or restrictions beforehand? -
DePiep (
talk)
13:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
|Drug_class=
in section {{Chembox Pharmacology}}. -
DePiep (
talk)
11:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)MOS:PHARM and MOS:MED currently say only to mention initial trade names in the lead (which is the consensus as far as I'm aware, and I agree), but there does not seem to be a policy for the drugbox's tradename field. Any comments on adding the same rule for this field in the drugbox documentation and/or on the MOS pages? (See [13] for a current example of the kind of IMO undesirable edit.) -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 10:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
|tradename=
in header Clinical data then. I'd support such a guideline (or described common practice), but I cannot formulate it.
this talk is from 2011. -
DePiep (
talk)
12:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
|drug_name, INN, IUPAC_name, synonyms=
, they show elsewhere in the box (because they mean something else). As I said, structurally limiting the list is good. -
DePiep (
talk)
13:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I propose to add option |PubChem=[Nn]one
, similar to |CAS number=[Nn]one
. The input will show, unlinked. Pages will be categorised by this. Would be in tandem with {{Chembox}} (
proposal).
Background: We want to crosscheck our chemicals with Wikidata. Recently, Wikidata has imported the PubChem source database, and so PubChem CID is a first candidate to check. One of the subdivisions of chemicals is "does not have a PubChem CID, so nothing to check". That is what this option "none" would add, using Category:PubChem CID tracking categories. - DePiep ( talk) 13:36, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
I am not familiar with PDB ligands. So I just ask.
I propose to make the following changes to the infobox. Most are background changes, and related to formatting, prepare for Wikidata comparision, and second chemical (index=2).
|PubChem=None,none
for 'not a PubChem CID assigned' (as distinct from: not entered, unknown). Categorised. See also
#earlier announcement. The word '[Nn]one' will show.|PubChemStructure=
(SID) will show when entered (was: hide when PubChem (CID) was entered).|CAS_number2=
), kept parallel with {{Chembox}} when possible:|QID=, QID2=
to make Wikidata checking easier.|index_label, index2_label, index_comment=
|x_Ref=
parameters checked.- DePiep ( talk) 15:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
The following categories have been renamed. Current pages in the old name categories are added by {{Chembox}}. {{Chembox}} will follow this renaming later on. Old category pages will be deleted when empty.
An overview of drug maintenance categories is in Category:Infobox drug tracking categories. - DePiep ( talk) 10:37, 17 February 2017 (UTC)