Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Pharmacology and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcut

WT:PHARMWT:PHARM

Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19: 3 months

WikiProject Pharmacology was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 17 January 2009.

WikiProject
Pharmacology

General information

Departments
→ Assessment (Log)	talk
→ Research	talk
→ Editor outreach	talk

How to help

Requested articles (1) / (2)

Cleanup list

AI written Event-drive pharmacology: expert needed

The recently created page Event-driven pharmacology appears to be LLM written. While there are no obvious DOI errors, it needs an expert check that the claims in the article are really supported by the sources. Ldm1954 (talk) 10:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article has a bigger issue than just appearing LLM-written. Event-driven pharmacology usually refers to the mechanism of PROTACs, where transient binding to a target protein leads to its degradation, resulting in a long-lasting effect because the protein is removed. It is less often used in the neuroscience field. Not sure how to handle this. Boghog (talk) 14:23, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should rename Event-driven pharmacology to event/occupancy-driven pharmacology to include protein degraders and event-driven neuropharmacology drugs. Boghog (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this after responding to a post about it at WT:NEURO. I hadn't heard about PROTACS before, but I think this may be a false creation as to neuropharmacol. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As suggested at WT:NEURO, one solution is to expand the scope of Chimeric small molecule therapeutics to Targeted protein degradation (TPD), and convert Event-driven pharmacology into a redirect to the new Targeted protein degradation article. Boghog (talk) 04:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Template talk:R from drug trade name § Generic or nonproprietary name instead of INN

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:R from drug trade name § Generic or nonproprietary name instead of INN. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk) 03:43, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This concerns a proposal to change the wording that appears when {{R from drug trade name}} is used. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk) 03:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to amend chemical naming policies re: acronyms

I have proposed an amendment to chemical naming policies here at WikiProject Chemicals. This proposal substantially concerns drug-related articles. Here is the TL;DR: "Propose amending chemical naming policies to allow use of page titles with format "<acronym> (<disambig term>)", e.g., "DOM (psychedelic)". Current policies/standards do not allow this. The proposal is because oftentimes the acronyms are essentially the common/trivial name and because this proposed format is a good solution for very long, technical, and unrecognizable chemical article titles." I'm cross-posting this proposal here to increase attention and input on the matter. Thank you. – AlyInWikiWonderland (talk, contribs) 22:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Premethylenomycin C lactone "New antibiotic found 'hidden in plain sight'"

I just created a brief article for Premethylenomycin C lactone. Would appreciate any help from members of this project. Thriley (talk) 05:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

COI edit requests for Olpasiran

Hi! I'm a COI editor for Amgen through my employer, Porter Novelli. Reaching out because I've proposed some updates to build out the Olpasiran article stub on the article talk page. I'd appreciate any feedback. Thanks for your time! Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:19, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scrollable pharmacodynamics binding affinity table: proposal

A range of stub/start pages about obscure drugs have extensive binding affinity tables, but little text content in them. This leads to the problem of those tables colliding with See also/References sections and being generally distruptive visually. See: 5-MeO-2-TMT

TLDR: Are scrollable binding affinity tables something that could be allowed under certain circumstances? If so then which approach would be preferred and under what conditions?

My idea of fixing this issue without having to cut off data, describing everything inline, or adding unnecessary padding is to introduce a vertical scrollable table with a sticky header and footer. My sandbox currently contains a demo of how I think it should look like and behave.

The issue with this solution is that I'm not sure if it's possible to make it fully work natively. What I've sketched out breaks the visual editor and is generally far from perfect (visual bug at the bottom, utilising thicker than normal borders). Existing templates such as Template:Sticky table start don't allow for float and therefore text wrapping. Seemingly the approach of creating a custom template should fix all of the above, but this seems like a pretty narrow case scenario overall. Wσlrεη⎇ (talk) 14:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:DONTHIDE the question needs to be asked on whether to include tables like this at all. For the example you linked (5-MeO-2-TMT), the text of the article only mentions a handful of proteins in the table. Personally, I like having the extra detail as I find that stuff interesting, but it is very WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I would cut the table down to just rows for 5-HT_2A, 5-HT₆, 5-HT_1A, 5-HT_1D and 5-HT₇, at most.

Otherwise, a scrollable table template is fine, just as long as it meets accessibility needs. It's just that in most cases the content of the table itself is probably the issue. ⇌ Synpath 16:00, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for help with Tirzepatide article

Hello, I'm an employee at Eli Lilly and Company. I recently posted an edit request to make a change to the Tirzepatide article. I won't lay out all the details here, but essentially there's a passage in the Meta-analysis section of the article that I believe is misplaced. For further details, please follow this link to my edit request. Thank you in advance to anyone who takes the time to help out! JWatLilly (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steady State article?

Hello. Long time reader, beginner contributor.

The only thing I could find on Steady State is this. I feel like the concept of stead state in pharmacokinetics is important enough to have it's own article. What do others think? Profitofpan (talk) 01:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Amino acid

Amino acid has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:56, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about WikiProject banner templates

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

"This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale."

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:47, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)[reply]

Novo Nordisk

Hello! As part of my work for Beutler Ink, on behalf of Novo Nordisk, I've posted an edit request on the Novo Nordisk Talk page. I thought editors here might be interested in taking a look. Cheers, BINK Robin (talk) 18:36, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]