User talk:Box73

Thanks for uploading File:Frischs Big Boy logo small.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Historic Big Boy Restaurant Franchisee Logos.svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Box73. I reversed the disambiguation edit to Big Boy Restaurants. Your edit was correct stylistically however the issue has to do with the actual focus of the Big Boy Restaurants article.

Despite the corporate info box, the Big Boy Restaurants article isn't about Big Boy Restaurants International nor Frisch's but the history of Big Boy Restaurants. Big Boy Restaurants International is essentially the remains of Elias Brothers Big Boy, the Michigan franchisee. Bob's Big Boy restaurants in California have their own Wikipedia article. Big Boy Japan pays a license fee to use the Big Boy name and mascot, but that's about it. They have a distinct Japanese menu, their web page makes no reference to Big Boy Restaurants International and the Big Boy Restaurants International locations web page does not display the Japanese units (just as they don't display the Frisch's units). I added the information to be comprehensive. Considering Bob's is already covered, what that leaves is Big Boy Restaurants International having 2 restaurants outside Michigan, outside of Elias Brothers territory.

...

Hi, thanks.

The main thing is that the article has to choose its topic. If the claim is that it is about all of the independent entities then the corporate info box needs to be removed and the introduction needs to not list Big Boy Restaurants International or Frisch's as titles for the article (nor should it elevate those two above the rest). It is a common problem in Wikipedia that articles get started without the authors being clear about what the subject matter is and end up becoming unintentionally misleading. It is mainly an issue of introducing it correctly.

--MC

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Template:Amphetamine base in marketed amphetamine medications page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anxiolytic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Withdrawal syndrome. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Euphoria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aura. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Euphoria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hypoxia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Box73! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 14:35, Saturday, July 23, 2016 (UTC)

I noticed your change to the article on Harris Isbell. Long quotes, such as you included in your bibliography entry, are often risky as potential violations of fair use and copyright (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Quotations). In addition, although I don't have time to locate a Wikipedia citation, I believe quotes in reference entries (which are usually intended to be pointers to sources, with the actual material included in the main text) are also discouraged. I don't have time right now to look in detail at what you added, but you might consider what the long quote actually adds in terms of content, and try to trim it down and place the useful content in the text.

Finney1234 (talk) 19:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the article you cite is a nice find. However, I don't think the long quote should be in the Wikipedia article, particularly since the full text is available on line. A sentence or two summarizing what the quote says, in an appropriate section of the article (*not* physical dependence studies), with a pointer to the reference, would be a nice addition. If you can do that, great, otherwise I'll probably do it in a few weeks when I have time (I'll need to do a careful read of the Jaffe article).

Thanks,

Finney1234 (talk) 03:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Finney1234: Forgive my delay. I am researching the etymology of euphoria which is how I fell on this, Isbell seemingly the turning point where ordinary well being started to become stripped away. See the third footnote here. I suppose my long quote is influenced by the other refs at euphoria. Sorry and I could trim it, but it would be fine if you do so as I'm new to this fellow.

I'm not sure what you mean, "with the actual material included in the main text" since when the quote doesn't appear in the article space, the (ref) quote either clarifies a specific point or elaborates somewhat on the material. I see the style you're using now.

Actually the entire Isbell article isn't freely available online, just long quotes included in Jaffe. Jaffe's use is also partly why I included so much. FYI the original material (but not the Isbell quotes) in the NIDA monographs is public domain, and free of copyright concerns. On that topic, do you think [this photo of Isbell] (from another NIDA monograph, page 20/544) would fall into public domain? If so I can extract it from the pdf.

Can paraphrases be placed in refs? As above.

Several comments

The general methodology for the addiction studies consisted of first getting subjects drug-free (with apparent exceptions for cigarettes and coffee)...

• Is this "(with apparent exceptions for cigarettes and coffee)" statement attributable? It reads like an original editorial comment. (It seems irrelevant.)
       Further, Although nicotine certainly produces persistent dependence, persons dependent on nicotine and caffeine weren't (aren't) considered "addicts", neither drug is controlled, ordinarily causes euphoria, marked tolerance or dose escalation.
• Instead of saying "first getting subjects drug-free", wouldn't saying involved or used or accepted former addicts or drug free addicts etc. be better? maybe "once subjects were successfully withdrawn from drugs" or at least "once subjects were drug-free." Also avoids a slight inference that other prisoners/patients could continue their illicit drug use. Wasn't drug withdraw a general protocol for inmates/patients and Isbell's methodology was actually to select drug free inmates/patients (who were previously addicted)? This is similar to selecting inmates who had at least six months imprisonment remaining post-study, so as to not influence a return to drug use. (Don't know if he continued this policy, which made sense but also a way of redeeming his methods,)
• Didn't Isbell also sometimes perform limited testing on non-addicts, and the different observations led to his addictive personality notion? (Of course Wikipedia's addictive personality article makes no mention of him.) You covered this.
• In psychedelics consider grouping psilocin with psilocybin, as psilocybin is simply the prodrug.
• Remainder added... re Drug Policy, early on Isbell etal seemed much less liberal:

Many defenders of the existing legal structure viewed the "reduction" in the number of addicts between the inception of the narcotic laws and the end of World War II as evidence that punitive policies were actually an effective deterrent against addiction. In 1948 several physicians employed by the government wrote: "This reduction has been largely due to vigorous enforcement of the Harrison Act and the Federal facilities for the treatment of addicts" (Vogel, Isbell, and Chapman 1948)
— Goode, Erich. "Drugs and the Law" in Drugs in American Society, First Edition, Chapter 7 (interior quote from: Vogel, Victor H., Isbell, Harris, and Chapman, Kenneth W. 1948. "Present Status of Narcotic Addiction." The Journal of the American Medical Association 138: 1019-1026.)

Great job building this article! — βox73 (৳alk) 11:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC) / 11:32, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughtful comments here, and your recent good edits. I just got back in town, and will respond more thoroughly in a few days. I still believe (for various reasons, including general wikipedia style) that the long quote is inappropriate, and I'll probably go ahead with an edit that removes the long quote but includes the main sense, as well as a pointer. You, of course, can revert my edit if you wish :-).

Finney1234 (talk) 04:37, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think a photo of Isbell would be great, but I wasn't willing to sort through what the restrictions/constraints were. If you think there's a photo which meets Wikipedia copyright guidelines, please add it.

Finney1234 (talk) 04:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of "addictive personality" didn't jump out in my own readings of the cited Isbell articles. If it's a theme that he focuses on, then possibly something should be added.

I'd also be very interested in why you think Isbell was a "turning point" re: Euphoria. I don't follow you there, and I'm interested in your thinking.

"Drug-free except for caffeine and cigarettes": the factual basis is a general reading of the cited sources (e.g., some reason to believe subjects were still allowed to smoke tobacco), but I didn't provide any specific reference. I believe it's reasonable to consider both caffeine and nicotine as mind-altering drugs, regardless of their legal status (also alcohol) (that's a large part of why people consume them, right?). I also believe all three can also be considered as (loosely) "addictive" (i.e., capable of causing abstinence symptoms in at least some users). It strikes me as interesting in this context that caffeine and nicotine were not considered as drugs, which is why I mentioned it.

Finney1234 (talk) 05:09, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Finney1234: Welcome home!

Re ref quote. Go for trimming or paraphrasing the quote. You'd do a better job than me.

Re photo. I recently added such a photo under fair use but the photo I found is likely public domain, but scratchy. I'm on a borrowed computer but as soon mine's in business I'll get to it.

Re addictive personality, it was an early remark or I might be confusing Isbell with his predecessors. It's in line with your quote of, "character disorders or inadequate personalities".

Re euphoria turning point. Euphoria was initially referred to a medicine's effect making a person feel well and hopeful. Freud referred to cocaine causing "normal euphoria of a healthy person". In the mid-late 19th century it started to be used referring to psychosis, psychoactive drugs and some later stage terminal illnesses. In 1940 an article in The Journal of Psychology defined euphoria as a "state of general well being ... and pleasantly toned feeling.

Isbell corresponded with Keats & Beecher who included this footnote in their 1952 article[1] (you have to save the jpg of the free first page and zoom into the bottom of the page, footnote 3):

[Footnote 3] Since matters of some interest hang upon the definition of "euphoria", direct enquiry [sic] of Dr. Isbell brought the following comment (letter of November 1, 1951). "I think it would be wise to exercise a certain degree of care in our use of the term 'euphoria'. We use it here in the sense of a train of effects similar to those seen after the administration of morphine. These effects include changes in behavior and objective signs, such as constriction of the pupil, depression of the respiratory rate and volume, drop in rectal temperature, etc. We do not use it in the sense of 'feeling of well-being', as this is something that I have been utterly unable to evaluate." The present authors prefer to limit the definition of euphoria to "a sense of well-being".

(Writing about the etymology of euphoria, I am collecting uses building on bare bones dictionary etymologies. I have not posted any of this yet and need to avoid crossing into original research or synth. The following is subjective.)

Isbell seems to have discounted the normal euphoria definition, probably because it was hard to discriminate or meaningless to his studies. Of course he did note/describe the mental states distinct to his subjects. My impression is that his prominence began to influence others in the field. I've let this effort stall temporarily except that a 1957 article didn't consider euphoria detrimental but an effect that "enhance[s] the value of a major analgesic." Euphoria is a major reason people use or begin to use drugs recreationally, but addiction comes from plastic changes in the brain; it becomes a compulsion.

Re cigarettes/coffee. Mind altering? Depends on the definition. To me, mind altering alludes more to psychedelics and marijuana. They Cigarettes/coffee are psychoactive, but their effect is mild as commonly used and produce adverse side effects in higher doses. I don't think of coffee or cigarettes as producing euphoria. (Last time you drank Coke or iced tea did you get high?)

What you say was the reasoning for many years. And addictive drugs can cause abstinence symptoms, but doesn't mean one is addicted or the drug is highly addictive. Addiction creates a compulsion to use the drug, even when one is past abstinence symptoms. Abstinence symptoms occur with substances not even psychoactive.

Nicotine is addictive. It is difficult for most people to stop. But it doesn't cause euphoria or much euphoria. Nicotine is stimulating at low doses and smokers usually don't continue to escalate the dose. That is different from those chasing euphoria, such as with opioids or cocaine. Addiction to caffeine is controversial.

Consider too:

• Drug screens are given for employment, to persons on parole, and regularly to persons on Methadone maintenance but don't screen for nicotine/caffeine.
• I'm not aware of DWIs given for nicotine/caffeine.
• Similar to coffee... For centuries the Indians in Peru chewed coca leaves when traveling in the mountains to compensate for the altitude. In this form, the dose of cocaine is low and gradual. Addiction didn't occur.

Personally I'd probably only comment on coffee or cigarettes if they effected the studies, this differed from other researchers, or there was some intention behind it. Otherwise, if you keep it, I'd either add something like "as typical at the time" or put it in a footnote. But use your judgement.

βox73 (৳alk) 03:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC) editied βox73 (৳alk) 05:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, cool comments. The "inadequate personalities or character disorders" is just a quote from Isbell; to tell the truth, I think it's fairly meaningless (my guess, as I wrote, is that it's based on MMPI test results, because they clearly administered that test, but I don't know enough about MMPI usage at that time to be sure).

I'd like to leave the "coffee and nicotine" in. For me, the point is that I believe these *are* drugs (even if the effect is mild, and even if they don't cause euphoria). So to say "drug free" when the subjects are allowed to use mild, socially acceptable substances that alter mood would not (to me) be precise and accurate. We both understand that "drug" (in this context) and "addiction" are tricky terms (I tried to be careful and non-committal in what I wrote, accepting that people use "addiction" in many different ways).

I had never run into the euphoria slant (or known that that was one of the evaluations that Isbell did of new substances: oops, I need to reread the Jaffe to see exactly what it says), so that's a very cool addition. I will make that point in text, remove the quote, and include the online citation reference (but I'll reread the Jaffe first). At some point, I'll try to locate the full original article.

The 1967 San Rafael citation about marijuana is new to me, and very interesting. I need to read that carefully too.

However, it seems to me (from what you wrote) that Isbell wasn't discounting "euphoria", just saying that (as a scientist) it wasn't something he could measure. Coming up with an acceptable "euphoria" scale would be contentious (though with psychedelics he did try to come up with some sort of scale, though I don't remember if he made claims about just what it was measuring). So it seems strange to me that Isbell's disinclination to measure "euphoria" would have had any effect on the field (that is, "euphoria" is simply not mentioned in most of his work, it is not criticized or claimed to be a worthless concept).

You might have fun reading the "Narco Brat" reference; Marjorie Senechal is a mathematician who grew up at Lexington. I actually wrote to her in hopes that she still had the full Isbell interview that she excerpts from (which included the important information that the psychedelics research was actually *initiated* by the CIA), but she didn't think she did.

My .02 :-)

Thanks very much,

Finney1234 (talk) 07:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, there are experimentally well-established "Caffeine Withdrawal Symptoms", though the effects are generally pretty mild (in my opinion, about the same as the documented "Marijuana Withdrawal Symptoms": largely irritability for a few days). Obviously, I'm not going to make any claim about whether this equates to "addiction" :-).

Finney1234 (talk) 07:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the writeup of the 1967 San Rafael reference; hopefully you'll approve. I'm pretty sure it's an accurate summary. Great reference; I don't think I'd encountered the dosage data in any of the existing references or I would have included it.

Finney1234 (talk) 05:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Box73 I ended up looking back at this talk section for some reason, and in retrospect I think it really belongs on the talk page for the Harris Isbell article. Do you have any objections if I copy this section and put it there (there's a lot of interesting discussion and references about Isbell, and it'd be nice to have it attached to the content page).Finney1234 (talk) 23:01, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Finney1234 Hey pal, that's fine with me. Sorry for the delay, but let me know if I can be of any help. βox73 (৳alk) 17:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Box73 I've copied it to Talk:Harris Isbell. Delete it here if you want, or leave it, or do whatever you want. Thanks! Finney1234 (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Box73. 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]

When you make changes to references with VE it adds a bunch of empty parameters.[2] Supposedly they are trying to fix this bug. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:03, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's a fairly straightforward relationship between these two types of reinforcers and rewards: primary reinforcers are intrinsic rewards; intrinsic rewards and primary reinforcement do not require associative learning to occur in order to be rewarding/reinforcing; secondary reinforcers are associated with extrinsic rewards; both secondary reinforcement and extrinsic reward requires that classical/operant conditioning occur, thereby pairing a neutral stimulus (i.e., one that normally isn't rewarding or reinforcing in its own right) with a rewarding stimulus, before a neutral stimulus begins to function as a reinforcer and induce activation of the reward system. This relationship is mentioned here. I hope this helps. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 20:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Seppi333: I now understand the mechanism of Mr. Ed's gambling disorder!

Actually I see what you mean. The real issue is that for most people, money isn't really the reward, rather the entertainment and excitement of winning (or that possibility) are. That is intrinsically rewarding.

I made the reward/reinforcing reverse because it makes more sense read that way. If a primary reinforcer early on repeatedly failed to provide the reward, that reinforcer should wane.

I'd like to comment on: "Addiction ... occurs over time from chronically high levels of exposure to an addictive stimulus (e.g., morphine, cocaine, sexual intercourse, gambling, etc.)"

1. There is an issue of satiety in some cases (e.g., sex with the same person).
2. I'm concerned regarding a blanket statement about addiction resulting from chronic high levels of morphine. Dependence certainly occurs but when appropriate to relieve pain, addiction doesn't necessarily occur. The statement could have a fear mongering effect on physicians and patients. (Uncle Bob already has stage IV liver cancer, and in his last three months better he hurts a bit than we chance him becoming a drug addict.)

Lastly, has addressing DRD3 agonists inducing addictive behaviors (e.g., gambling) been considered? These so called impulse disorders clearly display addictive behavior. — βox73 (৳alk) 13:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC) βox73 (৳alk) 13:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about any typos/grammar issues in my response below; I haven't thoroughly proofread it.

• Your statement above - the one about how the failure to receive a reward which conditioned a secondary reinforcer causes extinction of the reinforcer - is correct. However, the time at which a reward is given relative to a secondary reinforcer doesn't matter in some cases or with some patterns of reinforcement. It's not necessary for a reward to be received before or at the same time as exposure to a reinforcer. For example, when secondary reinforcers pair with other stimuli to form chains of reinforcement that lead up to acquiring a reward, the intrinsic reward that ultimately established the sequence of reinforcers is attained only at the end of the sequence/chain (note: these reinforcers may provide an extrinsic reward at every step or some steps/points of reinforcement in the sequence though). In addiction, this phenomenon is often referred to as cue reactivity; secondary reinforcers for drug use - which are called "drug cues" - provide incentive salience (i.e., cause craving) for drug reward. While unusual, there have been documented cases where a secondary reinforcer also produces incentive salience for the secondary reinforcer itself (e.g., the sight of a crack pipe in a picture could cause compulsive wanting for a crack pipe and crack cocaine in some crack addicts).

ΔFosB accumulation from excessive drug use Top: this depicts the initial effects of high dose exposure to an addictive drug on gene expression in the nucleus accumbens for various genes in the Fos family. Bottom: this illustrates the progressive increase in ΔFosB expression in the nucleus accumbens following repeated twice daily drug binges, where these phosphorylated (35–37 kD) ΔFosB isoforms persist in the D1-type medium spiny neurons of the nucleus accumbens for up to 2 months.[1][2]

• Re: Addiction ... occurs over time from chronically high levels of exposure to an addictive stimulus:
  1. I'm aware that sexual appetite is typically sated when intercourse is repeatedly performed with the same person; but, based upon my understanding, this doesn't prevent the development of a sexual addiction, since activation of the reward system still occurs during intercourse in those circumstances. I imagine that the degree of dopamine and glutamate co-release from mesolimbic dopamine neurons is lower when intercourse is performed repeatedly with the same person though. I'm actually not entirely what circumstances (e.g., the frequency and duration of daily intercourse) are necessary for the development of a sexual addiction in a normal individuals; however, I'm well aware that drug-activated sexual addictions can and do occur in individuals using dopamine releasing agents, particularly amphetamine and methamphetamine which have well-documented cross-sensitizing effects on mesolimbic dopamine release (i.e., engaging in sexual activity while on amphetamine markedly enhances the amount of dopamine that is released from mesolimbic dopamine neurons at fixed doses of amphetamine) and sexual reward (i.e., they can induce a very strong aphrodisiac effect when sexual activity and drug use has been repeatedly paired; after pairing, drug use acts as a potent secondary reinforcer for sexual activity).
  2. The statement about repeated high-dose exposure to an addictive stimulus causing an addiction is correct, although the way you're interpreting it in your example isn't consistent with the intended meaning. When taken at sufficiently high doses over a long period of time (i.e., overdosing on a drug several times a week over a period of several months), an addictive drug will cause an addiction. This occurs because ΔFosB is induced in the nucleus accumbens from each drug binge, and small amounts of ΔFosB are phosphorylated and begin to accumulate, as shown in the diagram to the right (phospho-ΔFosB has an abnormally/exceptionally long half-life relative to virtually all other proteins in the neuron); once a sufficient amount has accumulated, addiction occurs as a result of ΔFosB's direct amplifying effect on incentive salience for drug reward.^{[note 1]}
     W.r.t. the example about morphine that you mentioned, neither low dose morphine therapy for the treatment of pain nor opioid replacement therapy provide doses of opioids that are high enough to allow ΔFosB to accumulate in mesolimbic neurons (for a given individual and any addictive drug, there is a threshold daily dose that allows ΔFosB to accumulate when doses are taken in excess of that threshold). Opioid replacement therapy is designed to alleviate the symptoms of opioid dependence without causing or maintaining an addiction. In other words, the treatment of heroin addiction with morphine uses doses of morphine that are inadequate to cause ΔFosB accumulation. Similarly, the treatment of ADHD with therapeutic doses of amphetamine involves doses of amphetamine that are inadequate to cause ΔFosB accumulation. However, it is possible that some individuals require sufficiently high doses of morphine which would allow ΔFosB to accumulate. As long as such therapy is only short-term (i.e., maybe a month at most), addiction isn't likely to occur; however, if sustained therapy is required with those doses, developing an addiction is a very real risk.
• The effect of direct/indirect dopamine agonists – like the DRD3 direct agonists that you mentioned or amphetamine (an indirect dopamine agonist) – on the development of addiction to various behaviors has been mentioned in the amphetamine, addiction, and sexual addiction articles; this phenomenon is called a dopamine dysregulation syndrome.

I hope this clarifies things. Anyway, I wanted to thank you for your help with improving articles on reward-related topics. I know we sometimes argue (a lot); however, I recognize that your intent is to improve articles and most of your edits in this subject area have been made improvements. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 19:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since I remembered how confused I originally was about how incentive salience relates to classically conditioned operant reinforcers (i.e., secondary/conditioned reinforcers), this ref, might help clarify things if you're interested (ignore the computational aspects of that article). If you're not familiar with classical conditioning, I wouldn't bother trying to read that though. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 23:07, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

References[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bart D. Ehrman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nones. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not, little bot; this disambiguation page defines the primary topic. — βox73 (৳alk) 14:19, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that this is a really long-delayed follow-up, but I figured I'd mention it here since it was relevant to a past conversation and IMO it's pretty interesting in its own right.

In the section that I just archived on the reward system talk page, I mentioned, "Berridge stated in one of his refs (I'll pull the quote tomorrow) something along the lines of an "aura of pleasure" might be associated with anticipation of a reward, but he never outright called it pleasure." I was referring to this passage from Berridge's "Pleasure systems in the brain" review:

Drug enhancement of incentive salience could make other people, events or actions in the world all seem more attractive, and be powerfully enabling of engagement with them, which might well carry an aura of euphoria even if not truly hedonic. Viewed this way, subjective reward experience may be partly synthesized from motivation and cognitive appraisal components, similar to many other emotions (Barrett et al., 2007). This mistaken appraisal explanation may also apply to cases of electrode self-stimulation described below.

I thought you might be interested in that excerpt since you added some stuff to the euphoria article a while back about euphoric seizure-related "auras" as well as non-pleasurable euphorias. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 23:19, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Seppi333: Thank you my friend.

Berridge's aura is more about a vague background feeling. As you may have mentioned before, he & Kringelbach also use "aura of euphoria" in "Neuroscience of affect: brain mechanisms of pleasure and displeasure":

One possibility is that some psychostimulant euphoria comes from the ‘wanting’ component of reward: a world that seems more attractive may well carry an aura of euphoria.

With epilepsy, an "aura" is actually a partial seizure that may or may not spread enough to cause a "clinical seizure" (where consciousness is lost). When blissful, the auras tend to show activity in the insula. Not surprisingly, these folks resist taking antiseizure meds.

I saw your reward system talk response to XUY49 about NIDA. Let me add:

• I ordered some NIDA educational material and discovered it is outsourced and copyrighted. So public domain isn't guaranteed and copy/paste might be a copyright issue.
• Exploring euphoria, I landed on an NIDA for Teens page saying, "The drug causes surges, like waves, of the brain chemical dopamine, which initially produce the euphoria." Elsewhere on the site it says, "Normally, the reward circuit responds to feelings of pleasure by releasing the neurotransmitter dopamine. Dopamine creates feelings of pleasure. Drugs take control of this system, causing large amounts of dopamine to flood the system. This flood of dopamine is what causes the “high” or intense excitement and happiness (sometimes called euphoria) linked with drug use."

What's going on with the refs at reward system? I see you fixed the boldface ones and thanks. Note the citation in the pleasure centers subsection (Berridge and Kringlebach, Neuroscience of Affect). I was going to fix the punctuation then discovered its contents are constructed in reverse order; after the first quoted sentence, it skips back three paragraphs. (Is this acceptable?) — 06:15, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Ahh. Thanks for the clarification about those auras.

• The quote in the Neuroscience of Affect citation was missing an ellipsis ("...") between the non-adjacent quoted clauses; I've fixed that and put them in the order in which they appeared in the source. I'm pretty sure that was a reference that Petergstrom added. As long as there's an ellipsis between non-adjacent clauses, it doesn't matter much if they're quoted out of order so long as the clauses are unrelated. I sometimes do this when I think a more notable quoted statement should be given more prominence (i.e., placed at the beginning of the quote) relative to other quoted statements; however, I sometimes unintentionally place unrelated quoted statements out of order. Ideally, quoted excerpts should be ordered in the sequence that they appear in the source.
• The main reason why I'm opposed to citing those NIDA information pages is that they contain extremely simplified/dumbed-down explanations that verge on being inaccurate. The policy-related reason for not citing that source is that most webpages on the NIDA site don't actually satisfy MEDRS. Dopamine itself may or may not cause acute subjective pleasure; if it does, it doesn't do this by signaling through the NAcc shell or VP hotspots. It's possible that dopamine does directly mediate acute subjective pleasure by signaling through the putative orbitofrontal cortex and insular cortex hotspots though. Indirectly, dopamine likely mediates pleasure in the NAcc/VP by inducing endogenous opioid and/or endocannabinoid release as a downstream effect (in which case, dopamine would mediate the endogenous opioid-releasing effect of amphetamine - amphetamine#Other neurotransmitters, peptides, and hormones).

If you see any other issues with the references at reward system (excluding those in the History section), let me know. I plan to reformat the references in the History section at some point in the future - I know that those are badly formatted ATM. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 20:05, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Big-Boy-Comic-Book-Composition.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 01:12, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Big-Boy-Comic-Book-Composition.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2016 Cure Award

In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... Now to figure out why CheckWiki is finding something that isn't there. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ShakespeareFan00: That was fast! I'm using <br /> and {{in5}} with some bundled refs. Perhaps it's seeing the multiple citations in one bundled ref, assuming I'm using a list format and interpreting the breaks as superfluous.

I would strongly suggest you ask the CheckWiki project to implement an exclusion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Big-Boy-Comic-Book-Composition.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am give you the heads-up that a number of editors believe that all Big Boy restaurants through the US are Bob's, especially in Michigan. Would you be able to find any citations in any recent reliable source that can pass WP:VERIFY which would be able distinguish between the two brands? All I can find on the Big Boy International website is a slight difference in menus but nothing on the website that identify which of the 81 restaurant locations are actually Bob's. Unfortunately blogs and similar self-published sources would fail WP:VERIFY.

A number of authors insist that all 81 restaurant locations are Bob's and it might not be too big of a stretch to argue that "Bob's Big Boy" as a separate identity does not exist anymore.

That being said, you might want to make a comment on this edit and this edit since you appear to know a lot about history of the Big Boy chain. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 01:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: Please see my response and reasoning at Bob's Big Boy talk page.

Great response! I believe the key response to the other editors is that no single source exists that would be able to answer the simple question on how many Bob's are currently in operation, but it would require the use of many different sources (that hopefully have not gone stale) to correctly answer the question.

BTW, can you take a quick look at the Bob Wian article to which I quickly added a bunch of new sources (which was sorely lacking), but not enough time to properly rewrite the article (like adding a section about his political career and/or his work on various merchant associations that helped shaped future laws)? (I did not had time to look at the many historical newspaper articles about Wian that are available since the 1940s or the trade journals from the 1990s.) Thanks. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 02:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Box73. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of ethnic slurs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russki (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Box73. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Big Boy Logo Revised 2014.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Pbroks13 (talk) 17:16, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are an expert on all things concerning Bob Wian's Big Boy, I thought you might want to know about the page move discussion for moving Johnie's Broiler to Bob's Big Boy Broiler that is currently going on at Talk:Johnie's Broiler#Requested move 9 July 2019 in the outside change that you might want to give your opinion on topic or even participate in the voting on the subject. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 03:43, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: Hey, thanks. I would like to see what's happening. I'll check it out right now. — βox73 (৳alk) 01:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. Although it currently looks like the vote is to keep the current name, the major side effect of the interesting discussion seems to have produced active editing by experienced editors on that article (and also also Bob's Big Boy). (It is interesting that you had found the "dive bar" vandalism that appeared to have been embedded into the article for almost a decade and every editor since that time seemed to have missed.)

BTW, I just noticed that the Bob's Big Boy article lacks an Infobox that would summarize the article (which Google and other search engines uses to draw their information on). Do you think that the template {{Infobox brand}} would be more appropriate for that particular article than, say, the template {{Infobox company}}^{(Note: removed typo on 9 Aug 2019)} since Bob's had ceased being a company after Marriott sold the chain to Elias and Elias (and other franchisees) dropped their own brand? -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 01:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: I believe the Food Network show "Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives" led an editor to believe the terms were synonymous and wikilink "dive bar" in good faith. It's encouraging to see the active editing. I hope my editing of that editing is as well received. Your pen is always needed.

I've pondered the Bob's Big Boy infobox too. I needn't tell you about the confusion between Big Boy and Bob's Big Boy. The brand template makes sense but it's unfamiliar to me. How about if we draft both infoboxes in a sandbox and see how they compare.

Do you know anything about the change of ownership of Big Boy? As you may know, Bob Liggett died recently already having quietly sold the company. The Michigan press published nothing aside from his obituary, perhaps because Liggett owned radio stations and a newspaper.

My friend, you are too humble for your tireless contributions. Thank you. — βox73 (৳alk) 06:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC) fix reply to βox73 (৳alk) 01:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt the original "dive bar" was orginally done on good faith since the same edit had inserted other questionable things that were quickly removed the next day or so (except what you found). The code used, [[dive bar|drive-in]], is known as a "sneaky vandalism" since the wiki-link appears on first glance (in non-edit mode) to go to the article drive-in but actually links to dive bar.

Testing drafts of both infoboxes in a sandbox is a great idea. A well crafty Infobox should serve the same purpose as that used by a medical or scientific abstract, a quick summary on what the article is about. If we have a hard time trying to decide between the various of candidates, we could solicit additional opinions with the persons behind WP:MOS for their opinions. IMHO that people are most productive when there is a creative discussion among several persons who are interested in improving the article by exchanging different ideas.

It is news to me that Liggett had just died last month. I had previously read that he was in 70s and declining health and had made news by selling his other businesses. I think a section needs to be added about the management of Elias Inc. and later BBRI by CEOs Tony Michaels, Keith Sirois, and David Crawford. (I found out that Keith Sirois and David Crawford were also involved in another Michigan area business while both worked for BBRI. [3]) How did these people help/hurt the company during their tenure by making the right/wrong decisions.

Did you see the recent article (June 2019) in Food & Drink? [4] According to the article, Crawford was involved in the leveraged buyout of the company from Liggett and had helped turned the company around. If additional sources can be found, this info needs to be added.

I still think you should should write that historical picture book about the rise and slow decline's of Bob Wian's burger empire (along with Wian's biography and also Roy Roger's Roast Beef) since you have accumulated quite a few reliable sources to write one. Who knows, you might get enough funding via Kickstarter or Indiegogo to rent a classic muscle car to visit all five Bob's and video interview relatives of the key people involved with Wian. That would a fun few days of summer.

Did you hear that the new Big Boy franchise is going to open soon in Thailand? The Thai website refer to you (and other editors) as the "Wiki Lords" for your contributions WP contributions and they misquote the articles by confusing Bob's with BBRI. Did you know that there was a previous franchise in Bangkok that was active during the late 1990s and early 2000s that involved an Australian expatriate living in the U.S. and a Thai arms dealer? According to a April 12, 2000 article in the Wall Street Journal, the first franchise "began in a Las Vegas nightclub with a Thai arms dealer and an offer too good to refuse. Mr. Smythe, a 53-year-old Australian infomercial king who was living in Malibu, Calif., got a call one night in 1995 from his Thai brother-in- law. He asked Mr. Smythe to meet him and a "businessman friend" in Las Vegas..." If you can, you need to get a clipping of this article.

The Bob's article needs a section discussing the Bob's franchise during Wian era in Tuscon and Phoenix that were operated by former employees of the Glendale locations and can be supported by the existing clippings. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 23:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed that the current description of Zensho/Big Boy Japan relationship with BBRI might be incorrect in light of Elias Bros'. bankruptcy filing since U.S. Bankruptcy court rulings are not neccessarily valid outside of the U.S. (unless the buyer of the failed company is willing to file a new company registration papers (and pay the associated fees) in the foreign company in question). Just assuming that Zensho is still making franchise payments could be consider Original Research (especially since the BBRI website does not mention any location outside of Michigan, Ohio, California, or North Dakota). Look what happened to Radioshack. The brand is now split between four different companies since the former non-U.S. franchisees found that they could buy the brand outright for a small one time fee. The El Pollo Loco brand is now split between three companies since a court in the Philippines had ruled that the Filipino franchise now owned the brand within the Philippines and not the U.S. company since the U.S. parent company had changed owners a number of times since the original franchise agreement was signed.

BTW, have you seen the YouTube video about Big Boy Japan ([5], [6], [7]) or Bob's ([8], [9], [10])? -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 23:43, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Found some historic menus and photos at the Los Angeles Public Library.

• Bob's (Marriott) 1969 Menu
• Frisch's 1968 Menu
• 1954 photo
• 2007 Bob's Menu
• 1994 Bob's Menu
• 1969 Bob's Menu

There are more stuff at the LAPL, such as menu mock-ups for Bob's and Shoney's. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 03:16, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: You may be right about the CEOs of Elias and BBRI, and there has certainly been drama between Michaels and Liggett. We're getting to (or past) the point of needing to split the Big Boy article, at least by Wikipedia standards (which I've been resisting). Any ideas?

I didn't see the Food & Drink article and thanks for passing it along. This is all I have seen, excepting business filings with several states showing a new owner (person), whom I don't remember offhand. Emailing the editors of the Free Press and Crain's didn't prompt an article.

My ex says likewise that I should do some Big Boy book, though I am probably more limited to articles, and too far from So. Cal. I've been collecting photos online, largely from eBay Big Boy items. High resolution images of a 1956 Bob's menu and first comic book are here: https://animationresources.org/category/big-boy/ (Click to enlarge images at bottom of page.)

A number of historic Bob's images collected by the Riverside Drive, Burbank store, is here. (Many are marked "Bruce B. Hermann Collection"): https://www.pinterest.com/bobsbigboy/ (follow items at bottom of page)

Thank you very much for the LAPL images and lead. I will explore it more presently but it looks good!

The WSJ article was reference here: https://books.google.com/books?id=HqUZ-aeWENIC&pg=PA359

Which, if you want to print it, is here: https://books.google.com/books/content?id=HqUZ-aeWENIC&pg=PA359&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U30EcvZ-2n-EBg8uNGVHW6tbvvGGw&w=1280

I tried to mention the Arizona stores opened through the employee franchise program in the Bob's Big Boy article. Perhaps that could be expanded. Someone made an issue of JB's buying those stores. In that regard, when JB's received additional territory from Marriott, units in those states used the Bob's name. I would like to find how many existed. It may be that most Bob's existed in 1988 when JB's dropped out of the Big Boy system.

I should try to contact Big Boy Japan, as we talked about before, and they might be able to provide press articles or press releases. I would assert WP:IAR if we're are simply clarifying the wording of an existing statement, but seek reliable sources for anything beyond that.

My newspaperarchive.com access expired but newspapers.com continues but neither include the WSJ. I might be able to do it through my local library; if so it must be accessed on site.

I have never considered the effects of a US bankruptcy on foreign licensure. Are there currently Big Boys operating in foreign countries other than Japan? — βox73 (৳alk) 02:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: Update, Crain's Detroit Business just published "Big Boy looks to bounce back under new ownership" https://www.crainsdetroit.com/restaurants/big-boy-looks-bounce-back-under-new-ownership — βox73 (৳alk) 02:41, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What a timely article! It look like Crawford is really turning the company around and it might survive and possibly grow. Yet I still don't know how they are going to complete with companies like Chipotle Mexican Grill, Blaze Pizza, Five Guys, or even In-N-Out Burger. Looks like my suspicions about Big Boy Japan being independent is correct. Just need to find how this was actually accomplished.

Maybe its time for you to submit your questions to Crawford since he (or his staff) might be willing to answer you. Maybe you could get them to release some photos under CCL.

The 2000 WSJ article is a great journalistic piece. Many textbooks on international business have cited this article. The article describes how one of Elias brothers visiting Bangkok telling the gullible Thais franchise that the business should be an instant gold mine, but was totally the opposite, which the article went into detail. The locals thought the big by statue was a strange American deity, so they would leave incense and other offerings in front of the statue.

LAPL is a great resource for old menus and photos. Just be aware that they are in the process of changing their server database from dbase1 to tessa, so things get broken from time to time. Not sure when thy will finally finish since it has been going on for at least the past five years. NYPL is another great resource but I can seem to gt their search engine to work properly and not sure if they have any Big Boy menus especially since there were not franchises, that I know of, in NYC.

Another great resource for Bob's pictures is Calisphere (https://calisphere.org/), which is sponsored by the University of California. They have a 1965 picture of inside the Bob's manufacturing commissary kitchen. Would that be beyond copyright? It can be viewed at either https://calisphere.org/item/ark:/21198/zz0002v2c1/ or https://dl.library.ucla.edu/islandora/object/edu.ucla.library.specialCollections.latimes%3A1591

More replies later, especially about WP article reorganization and how to split the articles. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 04:03, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Hardees2.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Box73! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Free access tag making refs not recognized as cite:news by Visual Editor, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thought you might be interested in this article from the Lynchburg paper showing the pre-Lendy's Adler's Big Boy sign/font.

https://www.newsadvance.com/news/local/history/from-the-archives-nostalgia-on-the-menu/collection_e3e4487a-c41e-5a5d-8632-84579039376d.html#1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.205.18.53 (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@50.205.18.53: I have seen and cited that article/photo but thank you all the same. If you see any other material please let me know! — βox73 (৳alk) 00:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Box73: It has been almost a year since we discuss about the possibility of you publishing a Big Boy book based upon the work that you have personally contributed on Big Boy Restaurants, Bob's Big Boy, Bob Wian, Frisch's, Eat'n Park, JB's Restaurants, and Johnie's Broiler. Once the pandemic dies down, go start a Kickstarter campaign to fund a photographic and/or YouTube safari trip to visit all the Bob's in California and interview many of the key people before they die off via a rented convertible.

The reason I mention this now is that I just noticed a burger book that came out recently by Sef Gonzalez (ISBN 9781633539631). Looking at certain phrases used in the book via GoogleBooks, Gonzalez appears to have borrowed very liberally from Wikipedia. How much of your work do you think he might have incorporated into his book? He has receive a lot of interesting quotes on Barnes & Noble and Amazon.

Have you been monitoring the daily page views for Bob's_Big_Boy or Big Boy Restaurants? In the hundreds, with spikes in the thousands, per day. Very respectable when compared to similar sized companies. Better than Blaze Pizza, but nowhere near as large as that as Burger King or Wendy's.

If you do things right to produce a good book, you might be able to get a free trip to visit Michigan, Ohio, California, North Dakota, and possible Japan.

You have done too much work, so far, to have others benefit from your labor of love. You appear to have also added a lot of new info since last year.

-- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Box73: Hey, yeah, write a book! What else do you have to do these days :-). (I was just glancing at Talk:Harris Isbell and really appreciating our discussion). Finney1234 (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Frischs Big Boy logo 2016.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]