User talk:Benjah-bmm27/2010

Chemical structure drawings

Hi, I followed your link from the reference desk to the structure of the ruthenium carbonyl hydride. I have a couple of questions,

• What do you use to draw chemical structures? (I assume you drew that one)
• Would it be possible to me to use that picture in my lab report if I properly reference it?
• If yes for the question above, would it be any trouble to have a picture of the structure of the Ru(CO)H2(PPh3)3 ruthenium carbonyl dihydride?

This is for a first year lab report and it is messy to hand draw in structures onto a typed report. Thanks for any help 188.221.55.165 (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Does User:Benjah-bmm27/MakingMolecules help to answer your first question? --Leyo 12:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello,

Can you give a link to the picture in question, just so I can be sure it's one I made?

If it is, you can go right ahead and use it - all my images are in the public domain, so you don't actually need permission, but it's nice of you to ask nonetheless.

I'm not able to make an image of Ru(CO)H₂(PPh₃)₃ in exactly the same style as my other images on Wikipedia, because I have changed software, but I could get a crystal structure and make it into an image in Jmol if you like.

Alternatively, you could just draw the molecules in ChemDraw or similar (in 2D) as this is the more usual representation used in most lab reports and academic papers - scientists usually only put 3D structures in when they have calculated or determined the structure themselves and the precise geometry of the molecule is the main topic of the report.

Ben (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Here are XRD structures from 1999 and 2003.

Thanks for pointing to my tutorial, Leyo :)

Ben (talk) 14:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I've made it into a 3D Jmol model for you, see if that's any use: http://www.benjamin-mills.com/chemistry/structures/Ru(CO)H2(PPh3)3/.

Ben (talk) 15:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Cl₂O₇

Electrons required for octets: 2*8+7*8=72

Valence electrons available: 2*7+7*6=56: total pairs: 56/2=28

Difference 72-56= 16: shared pairs (bonds): 16/2=8

Difference 28-8= 20 lone pairs

File:Cl2O7chlorineheptachloride.png

Electrons required for octets: 2*8+7*8=72
Valence electrons available: 2*7+7*6=56: total pairs: 56/2=28
Difference 72-56= 16: shared pairs (bonds): 16/2=8
Difference 28-8= 20 lone pairs

Thus, I think.

Greetings Jcwf (talk) 03:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

What software do you use for 2D diagrams?

Graphics barnstar

Hello Benjamin, I must thank you for all the 2D and 3D molecular drawings that you provided for my Wikipedia articles. One could argue that your images are the best part of all chemistry articles.
I see that you have posted intructions about how to generate 3D images; thanks for that too. But what software do you use for the 2D "roadkill" diagrams, like that of cyclohexanehexone? I tried a couple of free downloads for Unix but could not get usable results from them. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 18:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jorge,

I like pictures so I make more of them! I use ChemDraw and then Photoshop to make my images, although many other free molecule editors and image processing software should be able to make identical images.

If you need any pointers to get hold of suitable software, just let me know and I'll be happy to help

Ben (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

p.s. nice work on the carbon oxides, you've added lots of interesting new content.

Thanks about carbon oxides. (That subject was a 25-year-old unsnswered question of mine. Finally Wikipedia gave me the motivation to research it, and the answer turned out much more interesting and complicated that I could have ever imagined.)

Indeed the free programs I tried do draw 2D diagram; but the details (font, placement, thickness, spacing, etc.) are nowhere as nice. But I will keep searching. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the details you need are here: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (chemistry)/Structure drawing.

Ben (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Temporary blindness

Oops. I saw something bent, recalled vaguely you comments on non-bent Hg, knew some of these drawing come from organic chemists at one time, and assumed the worst... Thanks for not snapping at me. --Smokefoot (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Organyl group

A tag has been placed on Organyl group requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. &dorno rocks. (talk) 18:57, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Nice graphics for chemical compound

Nice description and graphics on User:Benjah-bmm27/Gallery, User:Benjah-bmm27/MakingMolecules. Have you thought of saving your description of making 3D images on your website? In the end, wikipedia is a public website using CC-by-sa 3.0 license so even I can make use of your work. Ktsquare (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

What's wrong with having User:Benjah-bmm27/MakingMolecules on Wikipedia?

Ben (talk) 17:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

My comment is meant to be a suggestion so that letting you be aware of copyrights. I was attracted to your work and just giving you a heads-up. Ktsquare (talk) 21:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh OK, thank you. I was just checking what you mean, I didn't mean to sound snappy!

I've already written the page and it's been on Wikipedia for years, so I don't think I would be able to claim back the copyright even if I wanted to. But since the text merely describes the use of a piece of free software to make images for Wikipedia, I'm ok with it being widely available.

Thanks very much for your concern, though.

Have you thought of joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry?

Best wishes,

Ben (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Template Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar to show wikipreciation for the templates that you have created, keep up the good work! Jdrewitt (talk) 07:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I just made them to save a bit of time and provide consistency and metadata.

Cheers!

Ben (talk) 09:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Your Comments about a Minus Sign in the Birch Reduction

Benjah-bmm27 (Benjamin?)

I noted the comments about a minus sign in the Birch Reduction.

That seems to be in a part which I didn't write. I could be wrong but I think V8rik wrote that part.

After I wrote my Birch Reduction article it had parts of the Old Birch Reduction article merged with it.

There was a commentary about Figure 3 which I had difficulty bringing in to replace an earlier version which had one error. The problem turned out to be that the repaired drawing had a designation with underscores while the original version had hyphens and the title to the file had to be changed. But that should be unrelated to your comments.

Best wishes,

--Howard E. Zimmerman 18:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Dear Professor Zimmerman,

Call me Ben.

It's great to see a scientist of your stature helping out here on Wikipedia. You might like to join the Chemistry Wikiproject, where all the PhD chemists chew the fat. There are many highly qualified, talented, and friendly people there. The most interesting discussions take place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals

Regarding my edit to the Birch reduction article, I wasn't implying any blame for the use of hyphen-minuses instead of minus signs, my edit summary was merely a description of the change I made.

Thanks for all your hard work on the article, it's much better now.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Transparency in D.S.

Hi Ben. I tried out Accelrys Discovery Studio 2.5 in order to replace incorrect molecule models on Commons. However, I was not able to save the image with a transparent background. On your how-to page you don't mention transparency at all. Could it be that Discovery Studio Visualizer 2.0 supports transparency, but Discovery Studio 2.5 doesn't? --Leyo 21:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I just use Photoshop to remove the opaque background. Most image editors should do this easily, a commonly used free one is GIMP.

If you need any more help, just let me know :)

All the best,

Ben (talk) 22:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Chemicalinterest, Bismuth triiodide

I added that uncited example in bismuth triiodide because I thought that all metal oxides react with acids to form the corresponding metal salts. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 14:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Sodium telluride

Could you make a visual diagram for sodium telluride? It would have the same shape as sodium sulfide, with the tellurium ions being a little bigger. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 21:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Never mind. I didn't know that a category existed that had all compounds missing a structure diagram.--Chemicalinterest (talk) 21:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Benjah-bmm27. You have new messages at Chemicalinterest's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

EDTA

Hi Ben. I hope you're doing well. I just wanted to let you know that there is a question at Talk:EDTA about one of the images you have created, File:EDTA-xtal-3D-balls.png. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ed, long time no see! Thanks for the notification, I'll reply now.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

IUPAC Naming

I am confused over why the IUPAC names that I've been adding are being reverted, they are genuine and recommended by the IUPAC Provisional Recommendations for the Nomenclature of Organic Chemistry published in 2004. They are not generated by myself; and they in the majority sourced from the internet. Even though some are obscure, they are prefered IUPAC names as opposed to the traditional names. I'm at a loss for how I can possibly discuss the placement of IUPAC names in the article, as I'm breaking no wikipedia rules, but trying to add factual material. Almost in every case, my naming edits are reverted without explanation. I need to know why conformity to uniformity is being so strongly opposed in this case. If IUPAC nomenclature is not being acknowledged than why was it created. As a note, I'm also engaged with chemistry at a university.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

This discussion is of interest to most Wikipedia chemistry editors, so I have moved it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals#user:Plasmic Physics.

Hope this is OK with you,

Ben (talk) 15:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

When should I be expecting a preliminary draft of the guidelines?--Plasmic Physics (talk) 11:11, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know, it depends on whether anyone writes them.

For now, stick to IUPAC documents as references for IUPAC nomenclature.

Ben (talk) 16:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

There are none that I can find.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 00:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Try searching http://www.iupac.org/, http://www.acdlabs.com/iupac/nomenclature/, and http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iupac/.

Ben (talk) 01:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I already did, and I can tell you that they do not contain IUPAC names, only recommendations for how to construct the names.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 02:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You're probably best off waiting until preferred IUPAC names come into widespread usage.

Ben (talk) 04:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

So I can add it under Other Names without a reference then? PINs will take years to be in widespread use. I'm not actually talking about PINs, I'm talking about systematic names that are already in use to some degree, be they PINs or not.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 05:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't add anything without a reference. If an IUPAC name is in widespread use, you could cite an article from a mainstream peer-reviewed journal, or better yet a review article, or even more preferable, a good textbook.

Ask again at WP:CHEMS.

Ben (talk) 08:22, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

What about all other Other Names that are unrefferenced?--Plasmic Physics (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not ideal, but it's not a big problem. It's probably more effort to remove them, and many of them could easily be referenced, it just takes time and effort and isn't really worth it at the moment.

Your best bet is to contribute other content from reliable sources. Ask WP:CHEMS for advice, or try User:Smokefoot.

Ben (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for making File:Sodium-selenide-unit-cell-1992-CM-3D-balls.png. It's beautifully made in depicting the unit cell of sodium selenide. The rhombic dodecahedral tiling is just tantalizing. Thanks for making my day today.—Tetracube (talk) 17:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Bedfordshire

Hey,

You are listed as a member of WikiProject Bedfordshire, a project that I am currently trying to revive. Please have a look at the projects talk page for an explanation. If you would still like to participate, please could you leave a note on my talk page. Thanks, Acather96 (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Bedfordshire

Hello, Benjah-bmm27, this message is being sent to inform you that, due to over three monts editing inactivity on WikiProject Bedfordshire, your username has been moved to an 'inactive participant'. If you object or would like to re-start contributing, please move your name back up to the active members list. Thanks,

Acather96 (talk) 07:41, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Pharmacology stub templates

Hi! I don't know whether this interests you, but the new drug stub templates use your space filling models of various drugs, and they look absolutely fabulous. Cheers, ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 17:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

They look great! Thanks very much for the message.

Ben (talk) 18:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably not this time

Probably nothing will come of my suggestion to re-balance the distorted world-view of PProctor, and it would be ill-advised to go into the fray without the participation of a lot of other editors. I am not losing sleep over it. See you around.--Smokefoot (talk) 02:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. Still ridiculous, though!

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 08:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

chromium(VI) peroxide

There is some serious angle strain in this molecule. Also if it wouldn't probably spontaneously explode upon distillation, I wonder if it is a little volatile, like Titanium tetrachloride. Anyway, this is on top of a peroxy motif attached to Cr(VI). O-O bonds are usually long, but from that ball and stick image it seems to me like complexed dioxygen? John Riemann Soong (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it's more like O₂²⁻ acting as a pi-donor ligand, much as ethylene does in, say, Zeise's salt. If you think about it like this, the peroxide ions are donating some of the electron density in their O-O π* antibonding molecular orbitals to chromium, so that should strengthen and shorten the O-O bond(s). If you fully removed two electrons from the two O-O π* MOs in O₂²⁻, you would indeed have O₂. If you removed one electron from O₂²⁻, you'd get superoxide, O₂⁻.

Ben (talk) 08:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Cobalt(II)_thiocyanate

Heya

If you have time, could you work your magic and make a picture of this compound's crystal structure? The ref is in the article already, but I can't read more than the first page for now. Thanks! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 01:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Voilà. See also File:Cobalt(II)-thiocyanate-trihydrate-xtal-1976-Co-coordination-CM-3D-balls.png.

Ben (talk) 03:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 04:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... it appears from the crystal structure that this is actually the isothiocyanate, not the thiocyanate? What does the article say? Thanks! --Rifleman 82 (talk) 04:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The article just describes what you can see in the picture, really. Says the N-Co and S-Co interactions are predominantly ionic.

What do you make of that?

Ben (talk) 08:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Nitrate-ion

Do you mind if I replace the δ symbols with the real charges in , or do you want to dit yourself? Use of that symbol for specific charges is not accepted by IUPAC and might be confusing for many readers.--Wickey-nl (talk) 14:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

You can't replace it with three negative charges... it won't make sense. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 14:58, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I could replace the δ symbols with one-third negative charges if you like.

Ben (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, with two-third negative. Nitrogen is 1+. Nitrate.--Wickey-nl (talk) 15:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Here it is: File:Nitrate-ion-resonance-hybrid-2D.png.

Ben (talk) 19:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I am afraid you did not get the clue. Mixing of formal and partial charges in one structure is not logical, because the letter are known; and conflicting with the IUPAC rules, p.378. It had been better to adapt the original file. You can also make N δ⁺, but that is not useful.--Wickey-nl (talk) 13:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

What're you talking about?. We don't always follow IUPAC rules. We make diagrams that illustrate the points we want to make. Comparing the original and new images, you can see the relation between them: δ = ⅔.

Ben (talk) 16:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

You are free to make useless images.--Wickey-nl (talk) 15:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

What kind of diagram do you want?

You asked me to make one, so I did. Then you say I didn't get the clue - what clue? If you want people to do things for you, be civil.

Ben (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand it was sounding unkind. The new image was just fine and much more useful than the old one. But it is a good custom to follow IUPAC rules, unless you have a good reason to do not. If there is no good reason, the image is more likely harmful.--Wickey-nl (talk) 15:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. I tend to keep images rather than replace them, unless they are factually incorrect. I think many people have too much respect for IUPAC. Their rules aren't always good ones.

There are different opinions on the matter, of course, but it does little harm to have several images showing the same idea in different ways.

If you feel strongly about δ symbols and full charges in the same image, raise the issue at WP:CHEMISTRY.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 15:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

NaSH

Nice work on the hydrosulfide structure. Probably can be used for KSH. And thank you for helping repair the connection to redistribution (chemistry). Best wishes,--Smokefoot (talk) 17:08, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'm trying to get three images, one for each modification, but disorder is hard to depict without confusing non-specialists.

Good work cleaning up molecular diagrams of non-molecular substances!

Ben (talk) 17:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think between the two of us, Wikipedia has unpropagated a lot of misconceptions about what stuff looks like. But it is also possible that readers just ignore the complicated images and the text and are still convinced that silver chloride is a pale green gas, etc. But the work goes on against these infidels...--Smokefoot (talk) 20:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Accelrys

I have the picture (3D) model of a chemical compound made with Accelrys, but I don't have Photoshop. What can I do? YOSF0113 (talk - contributions) 05:26, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Any image editor will work fine, there are free ones like GIMP.

If you need any more help, just ask.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 12:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Au2S

Nice image for Au₂S? I found about 100 papers through a CAS search, but no recent X-ray report. If you ever run across anything real on Au₂S₃, we might consider starting that article or at least mentioning it in gold(I) sulfide. I am trying to find material on isolation of [Au(SO₃)₂]^3-, which is S-bonded, and is used as an alternative to [Au(CN)₂]^- for electroplating Au.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I've had a look for crystal structures containing [Au(SO₃)₂]^3-, but to no avail so far. As for Au₂S₃, this 2003 paper suggests it's amorphic.

Ben (talk) 00:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

enol

I added the MO story to the enolate section. I hope you approve... Of course all electron pushers will hate me, but so it goes. ;-) (Sorry I am inorganic/soldi state). Hmm, Au2S? I don;t think it exists as stable compound and yes in a previous life I did some work on the Ag2S-Au2S system.. But that is long ago. Greetings Jcwf (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks very much.

I can quite believe that Au₂S₃ doesn't exist, but Au₂S certainly seems to. See Gold(I) sulfide for references to Greenwood & Earnshaw, etc. On the image description page of the unit cell I recently added to that article, I've provided a link to the original paper: Solid State Ionics (1995) 79, 60-65.

If you think there's something wrong with this, please reply! I'll make any necessary corrections.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 20:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

One way to measure sulfur gas pressures is to exposure a series of Ag-Au alloys (electrum) to the vapor and look at which one gets tarnished. The more silver the sooner it tarnishes. You can certainly go to AuAgS with that (that is a stable compound) but more gold rich than that at some point it stops getting tarnished even at high sulfur vapor pressures. If memory serves I think there is thermodynamic evidence from that at the end member (Au itself) should not give a stable sulfide anymore. Of course it may well be that you can make Au2S as a metastable phase somehow from other sources than the elements. Judging from the higher temperature phases in the Ag2-Au2S system that are all cubic, you'd expect a bcc sulfur lattice with Au on four of the 1/8 1/8 1/8 positions and at cursory glance that is what you are showing I think.

Jcwf (talk) 21:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh wow - quite a cheeky little system then.

I'll have a read about it, see if there are any new developments.

Thanks for the info :)

Ben (talk) 23:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I wrote up some stuff about it for our cumes at some point See. Not about the stability but our paper is referenced there.

Jcwf (talk) 17:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

image request

3M's PFOA replacement is ADONA, ammonium 4,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoate, CF₃OCF₂CF₂CF₂OCHFCF₂COO⁻NH₄⁺. Would you make an image? Thanks! -Shootbamboo (talk) 22:50, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

300px - how's that?

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 12:15, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It's great, thanks. =) Here it is in the page. Thanks again. -Shootbamboo (talk) 18:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Very good news

Dont know wether you were aware or not, but [1] has been included in The Big Book of Top Gear 2011. Acather96 (talk) 07:03, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for letting me know!

Ben (talk) 12:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

You're fallible

Hi over there. Could you edit this file if you still have it?

Cheers, --Smokefoot (talk) 20:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Done.

Thanks for reminding me about that one!

Ben (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

image request

These are not like my previous requests, but graphane and fluorographene, perhaps? Thanks again for your good work here. =) Shootbamboo (talk) 22:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

A picture was posted at fluorographene so nevermind. -Shootbamboo (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I wanted to make an image but it was a bit of a technical challenge.

Ben (talk) 20:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all. Thanks again. -Shootbamboo (talk) 05:16, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Request for assistance - image from crystal structure data

Hi Ben, I know you do some work with chemical structures, which I am hoping includes crystal structure data. I recently got the article Hans Freeman to GA standard, and am considering a run for FA. Freeman's PhD work included the crystal structure of biuret hydrate (completing most calculations by hand!), and I think an illustration based on the Acta Cryst structure (ref'd in the article) would be a nice addition. Leyo suggested you might be able to help. Would you be able to provide a suitable image? Alternatively, can you suggest someone else who would be better suited to help? Thanks. EdChem (talk) 12:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ed, I've located the structural data required. Give me a day or two and I'll have something for you.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 18:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Hexacyclinol

I saw the chemical structure of hexacyclinol that you drew on your website. Would it be possible for you to draw the structure Grafe proposed (see http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/84/i31/8431notw1.html) which was ultimately shown to be incorrect and put both of them on Commons? I'm working on putting an article together for this compound. Thanks, shoy (reactions) 18:10, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

User:EdChem pointed out at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_December_22 that your structure for hexacyclinol was incorrect. Just a heads-up. shoy (reactions) 17:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I've fixed the image on my website and here.

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 19:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Looks like File:(+)-hexacyclinol-2D-skeletal-200px.png (the one missing the side-chain) is unused and doesn't seem useful (due to that structural flaw). Maybe tag it for deletion? DMacks (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely, fire away.

Ben (talk) 17:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks like it's gone. Thanks for the quick work, guys. shoy (reactions) 18:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hexol

Hi Ben, would a new image of hexol for Coordination complex and Hexol be a good idea? If you like and have time.--Wickey-nl (talk) 08:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the month-long wait!

Cheers,

Ben (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Opening a .mol file in Accelrys Discovery Studio Visualizer

Hi, I have problems with opening a .mol file in Accelrys Discovery Studio Visualizer 2.5.5. When I open the file through DSV, I can see the data but I cannot see the 3D model in the Visualizer. Can you help me? YOSF0113 (talk - contributions) 05:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)