Talk:Alexander Shulgin

message: For the sake of completeness, it would be good if this article mentioned the 1994 DEA raid on Shulgin's laboratory Moe Aboulkheir 15:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Also a mention or brief explanation of the type of DEA license he possessed which allowed him to carry out his quasi-clandestine syntheses would be good too. Morphine 18:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay.  now it does.  --Heah talk 05:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: DEA raid

message: Zectran, the first biodegradable pesticide according to this article, isn't even a proper stub. Could we either get rid of the link or get someone to explain what Zectran is? (I for one am quite interested.) SubcomOvashins (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Zectran

message: #:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
I have passed this article, as I feel it meets the GA criteria. I think it's overall very well-written (with a few minor issues that were easier to fix myself), reasonably complete (covers the major & significant topics), and accurate. The material probably needs a few more references before being considered for WP:FA status, since everything is cited by only four citations. But the overall references meet the standards of reliability. I do have a minor concern regarding the use of the erowid.org reference, since that site seems to be more concerned with the illegal use of drugs than an actual scientific or valid media site (it's bordering on a blog, IMHO). But Google is unable to does not come up with any other references for the drug raid, and I won't let my personal thoughts get in the way of the GA review. It is questionable, however, whether this would stand up to the scrutiny of the FA nomination process.
Anyway, overall good job! Keep it up! Dr. Cash 00:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronological errors 

message: :Image:Shulgin.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shulgin.jpg

message: This section is hard too read. No links to the fulltexts. It would be better to write what he was working on and then add the reference for the article. Any other ideas? -- Panoramix303 (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable publications

message: I seem to remember some information about Shulgin being a member of the San Fransisco Bohemian Club and having attended the Bohemian Grove summer camps. I cannot find any traces of this now though. I also seem to remember some discussion which I thought must have taken place here, but obviously didn't, about his membership in the "Owl Club" which he talks about in PiHKAL being pseudonymous for the the Bohemian Club. Can somebody help me out here? __meco (talk) 09:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Owl's club in the book is clearly the Bohemian club.  He's not listed at List of Bohemian Club members but probably should be.  Sorry I can't be of more help. beefman (talk) 01:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bohemian Club membership 

message: In some sources Alexander Shulgin is referenced with a "T." as a 2nd name. Even the German WP lists him with a "T.". Does anyone know what it stands for or is this made up? -- 78.47.219.222 (talk) 21:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alexander T. Shulgin 

message: I see this being cited a few times in the lead. Is that considered a reliable source? I also removed some material about the father that seemed a bit to detailed for this bio, maybe just add back in that both parents were from Russsia, or whatever you call it at the time ect. Thanks, --Threeafterthree (talk) 16:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancestry.com as a reliable source

message: the picture on this page is messed up  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tribis (talk • contribs) 01:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  fix the picture  

message: I'm gonna go ahead and trim the second paragraph because, frankly, it looks like the author was high as a kite when he or she wrote it. I say this not as an insult, but as a critique of style. Right now the writing is flowery enough that it glorifies the subject, distracting from what should be a measured and non-biased account. The information presented seems to be alternately unverifiable (the mention of morphine) or embellished. Encyclopedic articles should adhere to a more-technical presentation, I think; so I'll get to work. 67.170.251.26 (talk) 14:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Various issues with the "life and career" section 

message: Yesterday I undertook some cleanup & rewriting of parts of the article. There was one section, however, that I decided not to touch, even though it is badly in need of work. In the Bibliography section, after the list of books, there is a subsection called "Other notable publications", which is a very extensive listing of articles that Shulgin published in a variety of journals. This list is far too long -- much, much longer than the norm for Wikipedia -- and needs to be pruned back to the most essential articles. If I had the requisite knowledge I would, of course, do it myself; since I don't, it would only be guesswork on my part. It needs to be done by an editor who has some knowledge of the literature in question and is thus in a position to make choices as to which articles are indeed essential, and which can be removed from the list. Anomalous+0 (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publications 

message: "Showing unusual humility in his famous book PIHKAL, Shulgin limits his pesticide days at Dow Chemical to one sentence in 978 pages." 
Really? He was very humble indeed! Oh my God, we lost such a great human being... 
Am I the only one who thinks this is improper for an encyclopedia such as Wikipedia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.192.193.97 (talk) 00:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. Sasata (talk) 00:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Neutrality 

message: . 213.109.230.96 (talk) 03:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  LSD has an indole ring, but it's not a proper tryptamine 

message: Seriously? This is a legitimate news outlet? Um, no it's not. While there is some interesting content there (even a broken clock is right twice a day), the site is written and maintained by a bunch of drug-addicted loons whose only purpose is to legitimatize their "habits". This site DOES NOT meet WP:RS specifications and should not be used as a source on Shulgin's death (or anywhere else on wikipedia). Lay off the crack, dudes! 96.33.109.58 (talk) 02:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you need to expand on your assertion that Erowid is not a reliable source. I tend to agree with you, but just saying that it doesn't meet RS specs doesn't really cut it.  See also this discussion on my Talk page of that specific paragraph. I personally believe that the editor who challenged me did, in fact, have a personal interest in promoting Erowid, but the statement made was factual and with the addition of a more mainstream source (which the challenger had reverted, and was reverted), I decided to leave it alone. Dwpaul Talk    15:27, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Erowid?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Alexander Shulgin. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.maps.org/sys/nq.pl?id=1610
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://psychedelicresearch.org/?p=125
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified