Talk:RTI-51

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about RTI-51.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Possible Original Research I tagged this because the tone of the article sounds like original research. Particularly the following:

For example, it is not documented to have been experimented with on man.

Another choice of ester should be tried, such as cyclopropyl, for example.

The rationale is that less "non-specific" binding is believed to reduce toxicity.

RTI-51 can be expected to have properties lying somewhere in between RTI-31 and RTI-55.

Thus, if accurate data is available for RTI-31 and RTI-55, then the data of RTI-51 can be deducted.

Is this from some of the references? Can it be rewritten some way to make it clear that the references say this? ChemGardener (talk) 02:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Changed wording and added reference. Meodipt (talk) 05:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Tables edit

Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just removed the first table, "Comparison of halogens", because it has no explanation as to its relevance and no source. The table was added in a series of edits by the now-blocked editor Nuklear.

I also removed the red styling of the text in the second table, as it was visually offputting and there was no explanation as to what the red cells were meant to indicate. If someone can figure out what was being conveyed by the red cells, and if that information should be preserved, perhaps there is a less offputting way to mark those cells. Kimen8 (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic