Talk:1-Pentadecanol
1-Pentadecanol has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: March 24, 2021. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from 1-Pentadecanol appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Feedback from New Page Review process
[edit]I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: I have added for you: stub sort, project banner, category. These are things article creators can and should do..
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
"C15H32O" listed at Redirects for discussion
[edit]An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect C15H32O. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- ... that 1-pentadecanol (pictured) is synthesized by creeping cucumbers, mutant fungus, and the Shell oil company? Source: Souw 1977, Barik 2018, Shell Global
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Two-room school
- Comment: This was the first article I wrote, but it seemed a little sad compared to my recent bops, so I decided to 5x it tonight.
5x expanded by JPxG (talk). Self-nominated at 11:23, 8 March 2021 (UTC).
- Recent 5x expansion, plenty long, and well written albeit a bit technical. QPQ done. The hook is delightfully whimsical, well-cited, and short enough. Image is free, used, and shows up well. Good to go. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:1-Pentadecanol/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Femkemilene (talk · contribs) 17:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this page over the next few days. Initial reading shows good prose and structure. FemkeMilene (talk) 17:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- The lede could benefit from having a second paragraph. While having jargon in an article like this is unavoidable, I think it can be reduced in the lede:
- What is achiral?
- Expanded. jp×g 04:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think people will skim over ethoxylation and sulfation if they're unfamiliar with them, but if you can think of a simplification that would be nice
- Expanded. jp×g 04:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- What is a surfactant?
- Expanded. jp×g 04:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- What is achiral?
- alveoli is a disambiguation page
- Fixed. jp×g 04:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- Shell states instead of claim, per WP:CLAIM
- The "claims" in that sentence was my attempt at getting the reader to pair Royal Dutch Shell's claims about its product safety with a little sodium chloride ;) (since it is a primary source, after all, and they have some quite compelling reasons to present it in a favorable light). If it's not appropriate here, I will change it accordingly.
- That's fine. I'd get a kneejerk reaction 'oh really?' after the words 'shell says', but maybe others don't and the word claim is more appropriate.
- The "claims" in that sentence was my attempt at getting the reader to pair Royal Dutch Shell's claims about its product safety with a little sodium chloride ;) (since it is a primary source, after all, and they have some quite compelling reasons to present it in a favorable light). If it's not appropriate here, I will change it accordingly.
- (not GA criterion, ignore if you will): 300—370 -> a shorter dash should be used there, right?
- I think MoS says to use en-dashes for intervals like that, but it doesn't make a huge difference to me.
- (not GA criterion): 𝜇g -> μg. Italics is a bit ugly
- You know, that pissed me off too: I just used {{mu}} for convenience and it gave me that stupid italic μ. I didn't bother to fix it because I didn't think anyone else would care, but you have given me an excuse to do so now.
- using a 1.2 ml -> using 1.2 ml?
- Fixed. jp×g 05:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- 50𝜇g -> space
- Fixed. jp×g 05:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- had been skin irritants -> are?
- Fixed. jp×g 05:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- The penultimate paragraph of properties uses alpha and beta form, while the last paragraph gives a lay description. Shuffle?
- That's a pretty brilliant catch, and a good idea. Done. jp×g 05:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- Is it possible to link Langmuir monolayer to something?
- Done. jp×g 05:17, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- Sources all look reliable, will check a few later. FemkeMilene (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- Image appropriately licenced FemkeMilene (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- degree signs in infobox need ° and space. FemkeMilene (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- The lede could benefit from having a second paragraph. While having jargon in an article like this is unavoidable, I think it can be reduced in the lede:
- Spot checks spotless. Will promote when at computer. FemkeMilene (talk) 07:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Weird formula
[edit]- Therefore, the interaction of several partially fluorinated 1-pentadecanols with DPPC in a Langmuir monolayer was analyzed in a 2018 paper. The molecules were F4H11OH, F6H9OH, and F8H7OH; as the fluorination degree increased, so did hydrophobicity.[17]
How these molecules exist without carbon atoms, and what are the real chemical formula of these molecules??? --Nucleus hydro elemon (talk) 13:36, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- This is kind of bizarre to me as well. I double-checked the reference (here) again, and it does indeed say "H15OH (F4H11OH, F6H9OH, and F8H7OH)". This seems to me like some kind of error (normal pentadecanol is C15H32OH). I agree that it should be impossible for pentadecanols to exist without carbon, and I'll have to look into it further. jp×g 23:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)