Talk:Barbiturate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Barbiturate is part of WikiProject Pharmacology, a project to improve all Pharmacology-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other pharmacology articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale.

what about statistics?

i'm new to this, but i would like to mention that in the mechanism of action section, there needs to be a total redo. but beyond that, the article implies that barbituates have a similar mechanism of action as benzodiazepines, however it would be important to mention that barbituates increase *duration* of Cl channel opening and benzodiazepines increase *frequency* of opening, this is important because it separates the anxiolytic effects of benzodiazepines versus the sedative effects of barbituates.

Spiritualfade (talk) 16:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Headline text

yeah waht about statistics?


== It's nice to have a picture

This picture is of non-descript pills, downloaded from http://www.morguefile.com/archive/?display=18993&. There's no indication from source that they are barbiturates. __meco 09:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

neeed more info

[edit] Antidote to overdose?

I understand Megimide and Deptazole have been used but I'm not an expert. Can someone help? Malick78 08:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


Hey this exact article appeared on another site... plagerism!!!! My name is Al Cohal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.212.61.234 (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Famous users

LOL! Leondegrance (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

who changed the image, the old one was more attractive, i'm changing it back —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.1.166 (talk) 03:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Template Rampage

Wow, someone really went on a template rampage... and the wrong templates were used too. Instead of the one that says 'this section does not cite any sources...' or whatever, the more appropriate template would have been the one about the sources being mentioned but there not being enough citations (because for some of the flagged sections, references are clearly given but just not footnoted) and that template could just be put at the top of the page, instead of being inserted into every section. (Was someone maybe just having a bad day?) Hmm, maybe it's just time Wikipedia started making templates that warn about bad usage of templates. Then we could put even more templates on this page.

For the record, much of the flagged information is accurate--what do you do when you know something off the top of your head but need to prove that some other guy on some other website said that it was true? That's not a good reason for deletion--I mean, when it's accurate but just not cited. Regardless, I found this page pretty amusing. 67.42.233.138 (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Template frenzy indeed! As noted above, much of the information is sourced but not properly referenced. Fixed one section (Truth serum), but more work needed and article would still benefit from consolidation. 84.92.241.186 (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)