Enzyme Catalysis Models

Glad to see that you have an interest in the enzyme page, as do I. I have done some of research on enzymes and have worked with students to find out how they can best understand enzymes. The "break down" of how enzymes work needs to be shown for students to understand how enzymes work properly and a condensed model seems to be missing steps that help unify the concepts. If you do not agree with my work that is fine and I understand that change, especially to material that you have put time into, comes with resistance. Regardless, I would appreciate it if you would choose to edit some of my work rather than just deleting it altogether. Since you seem to be interested in enzymes, you might be interested in some of my sources:

Journal of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Vol. 37, No. 4, July 2004, pp. 394-401. Journal of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Vol. 37, No. 5, September 2004, pp. 553-537

Enzyme

Glad to see you taking an interest in the enzyme page. It seems to be a target of vandalism from bored schoolkids lately, so if you see something odd, feel free to revert or drop me a line. I was wondering if you could take a look at the quantum mechanic material some user keeps trying to add. I've copied the text to the enzyme talk page, but would appreciate an expert opinion on its validity and/or appropriateness for the page. Thank you. Turnstep 04:08, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the revert war going on. We can't block since the user appears to have a dynamic IP number. Hopefully they'll get bored. It might even be a good idea to leave it for a 24hr period since they might forget about it if we back off? David D. (Talk) 23:07, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving it alone until tommorrow, hopefully they can find something constructive to do in the near future.Hichris 23:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What's up with hemoglobin being an enzyme (see the talk page of enzyme)? -- Boris 15:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

great job

The enzyme page is starting to look very good, nice work. I especially like how you pruned away the figures, originally there were just too many. Its much easier to navigate through the page now. I don't currently have time but I'll definitley help with proof reading etc. David D. (Talk) 21:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm pretty happy with the format right now, but I'm sure it could use a few more tweaks. Hichris 22:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Enzyme

I redrew the third diagram accarding to Biological Science by Oxford University Press. I don't really understand why you are confused? The active site doesn't cover up the entire substrate if the size of the substrate isn't appropriate. And you're the only here to complain. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 16:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas All!

Insulin

I see that you recently reverted some edits on the Insulin page. I'm not clear on whether you had some form of robotic system doing that, but I wanted to let you know that the entry regarding the Greatest Canadian Invention was not intended as vandalism. While it is not scientific content, I felt that it was a worthy addition to the article. I'll leave it to your discretion as to whether it should be put back. Aphenry 04:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I'm doing this incorrectly. I think the molecular structure of insulin should be kept on its page. Something's molecular structure is a basic piece of scientific information.

Please create an account and sign your comments. Molecular Structure? Do you mean formula? If so it is NOT relevant for a protein, for a small molecule most definitely but for a protein it is meaningless - the amino acid sequence is what is important (and if you really need to know the number of C N O etc you can figure it out from that). Hichris 16:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Universal genetic code

I've decided to open up a discussion on deleting this article: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Universal_genetic_code. Because a consensus is needed, I'm inviting all authors who commented on the merger proposal to contribute there. Many thanks! -- Madeleine 14:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hi there, have you ever considered joining the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject? We'd be very happy to have you as a colleague. Tim Vickers

Michaelis-Menten Kinetics

Hi, great that you got interested in the Michaelis-Menten article. Would you be interested in collaboratively trying to clean it up further in the coming few weeks? This also includes the Briggs-Haldane vs. Michaelis-Menten issue (I've just read the Briggs-Haldane paper, but need to dig out my paper copy of the Michaelis-Menten & this will take some time). Athenray (talk) 13:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Hichris. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]