Jump to content

User talk:Project Osprey/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Gallane

I have a chembox to insert on my talk page for gallane, if you don't mind. Plasmic Physics (talk) 09:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gallane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dimerisation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikibreak

I'm going to be taking a wikibreak for the next couple of weeks or so. Feel free to leave messages but they wont be read untill after I get back. Project Osprey (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Gallane

You may be interested in the "amphotericity" debate I am having in "Weird Properties".Talk:Gallane Another POV would be welcome.Axiosaurus (talk) 08:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Alas, I'm still on a partial wiki-break. I recently moved house and wont have internet access there for another 2 weeks or so. That being the case I don't feel that I can participate in this to any meaningful extent... that said, I still think that it reacts more like a hydride. Much like borane and aluminium hydride in-fact. I don't believe anyone refers to them as amphoteric. Project Osprey (talk) 12:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Enjoy the move. Moving house is like being beaten around the head with a wet fish....a relief when it is all over. I shall continue debating and perhaps in the fullness of time, when/ if there is no resolution you can join in the fun. Axiosaurus (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

phosphates

See my talk page for a reply. Petergans (talk) 10:47, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Monopotassium phosphate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polymorph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:15, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bone char, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Organic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

It doesnt exist as a monomer

Showing monomeric LiNtms2 is equivalent to showing molecular NaCl, at least in my book. I guess is some vacuum experiment it might exist but there is this thing about reality....--Smokefoot (talk) 10:08, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

@Smokefoot: we've had this issue a few times with aggregating organometallics. Perhaps we should try and settle it? I do see where you're coming from, really. It would be silly to not show the trimer but not showing the monomer doesn't sit well with me either. I have 2 issues really:
  1. No one draws it like that. If you were drawing a reaction mechanism you'd use the monomer, all the texts books I have discuss its reactions in terms of the monomer (although they of course mention aggregation) and if you were to ask 10 chemists to draw the structure I'm confident the monomer would dominate. There's a clear convention there and wikipedia is supposed to reflect things like that.
  2. The image in the chembox doesn't correspond with various details in the chembox (formula, mol wt, etc). I don't like that, I worry it'll be a point of confusion to lay readers. Having labelled images of both forms gets around that.
I'm not advocating the use of one image instead of the other, I just feel that both are valid.Project Osprey (talk) 11:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
"No one draws it like that". I can see your point. Most people (=undergrad-trained chemists) of course are pretty naive about structures of polar organometallics. Maybe you should raise the issue at the Chemistry Talk page since, like you indicate, we have an unacceptable disagreement between the Box and the Image. The immediate issue is how to represent polar organometallics, but one can imagine someone insisting on representing TiO2 as a triatomic because such as species has been generated and examined by DFT. My recommendation: non-existent but convenient structures be represented only by ChemDraw, and representations of more commonplace structures be represented both as ChemDraw and other fancier ways. Thanks for responding so constructively. I will revert my revert now. Cheers, --Smokefoot (talk) 01:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bismuth(III) nitrate may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • contains 10 coordinate Bi<sup>3+</sup>, (three bidentate nitrate ions and four water molecules).)<ref name=Lazarini></ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

It's pyramidal

Greetings. Pretty sure that sulfite esters are pyramidal, so if you still have your ChemDraw, you might pucker the S. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd found it on wikimedia but there's already a better one to replace it with. If you actually want the lone pairs shown explicitly then we'll have to make that image ourselves. Project Osprey (talk) 09:59, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

NFPA

As you did with Sodium borohydride here, could you do that to Sodium cyanoborohydride? It too has an NFPA issue. -DePiep (talk) 00:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Project Osprey (talk) 10:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

P3N5

Just read your contribution to Smokefoots question about primary souurces etc. ,saw that you had written the P3N5 article. I have the latest German Wiberg at home and this has a reasonable section on P3N5 with a detailed description of the structure of the alpha and a briefer description of the gamma as well as stuff on other binaries. If you feel your german is up to it I could let you have a scan of the relevant sections. By the way my german language skills are rubbish, restricted to swearing and ordering beer. I rely on Google translate for anything else. Best wishes. Axiosaurus (talk) 12:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer but I fear my German is even worse than yours. I'd actually forgotten about those pages until I started writing my reply - and as I now have pretty good access to literature I should be able to find better references (although its not massively appealing, they were frustrating pages to work on). BTW if you need access to papers I'd be quite happy to dig them up for you. Project Osprey (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
thanks for that kind offer. Axiosaurus (talk) 10:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

DOI at Molecular gyroscope

Clicking on the doi:10.1002/1521-3773(20020118)41:2<275::AID-ANIE275>3.0.CO;2-M link takes me to http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/resolve/doi?DOI=10.1002/1521-3773%2820020118%2941:2%253C275::AID-ANIE275%253E3.0.CO%3b2-M which says "Page Not Found ". Does it work for you? It's possible that the DOI string is given in the ref when one can find the ref, but something is wrong here. Is this a bug in the doi: URL-generation encoding? DMacks (talk) 15:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

For me it works fine, I'm taken to: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/1521-3773(20020118)41:2%3C275::AID-ANIE275%3E3.0.CO;2-M/abstract
The difference seems to be that in your case the brakets have been converted into unicode. I'm in work atm so I'm accessing via IE, what about you? Project Osprey (talk) 15:26, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I've tried it now from home using Firefox and I'm getting the same error message as you. Project Osprey (talk) 19:25, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Automatic continuous online monitoring of polymerization reactions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page COI. 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) 09:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Takahashi Taxol total synthesis may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ([[N-tosylhydrazine|H<sub>2</sub>NNHTs]]) to '''11''' and finally vinyl bromide formation ([[tBuLi]], [[1,2-Dibromoethane]] in '''12'''.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lewis Feuchtwanger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coinage. 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) 12:06, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Chemistry topics

Project Osprey, I'm glad to know of our mutual interest in chemistry, and thank you for the upgrades you provided to my recently created Wikipedia article. If you have a moment, please take a look at another article I recently originated related to chemistry, on William C. Drinkard. Many thanks, Nolabob (talk) 16:51, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for getting in touch. I don't tend to do a lot of editing at the weekends but I'll take a look of that article over the coming days and see if there's anything I can add. You could also bring it to wider attention by posting something over at WikiProject_Chemistry... Lord knows we need more active chemists there. --Project Osprey (talk) 17:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alafosfalin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antifungal. 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) 09:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

F2 complex

I havent read the Russian report on an F2 complex but it is probably ... I check later this AM when I get to work and access to the journals online. Of course F2 has lone pairs which could make it pretty different. Thanks by the way for all you are doing around here, your influence is really helpful. --Smokefoot (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it seems unlikely - when you compare the strength of a F-F bond to a F-M bond the metal always wins, even an unreactive metal like gold. I wouldn't be surprised if this were a low-spin [AuF6]+[F]-. To be honest though I'm dealing with articles in bulk at the moment, I'm doing some PRODing and cross-linking as I go but little more than that. And thank you, it's always nice to have someone interested. --Project Osprey (talk) 15:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Its a spectroscopy study on "stuff", that's what I gleaned from ChemAbs. My institution doesnt have access to that journal directly, so but dont get your hopes up. Russian journals are filled with mediocrity, unfortunately.--Smokefoot (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Dow Corning

Hi Project Osprey, I wanted to thank you for your help with assessing Dow Corning and improving the article's references. I've proposed a few additions to the article on the talk page, here, which I'm hoping could flesh out some of the basic background information the article is currently missing. If you have a moment, I'd be really grateful if you could take a look and let me know what you think. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't generally tend to edit pages about companies as I find it difficult to find neutral sources, but I'll give it a try over the coming days. --Project Osprey (talk) 09:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Super appreciated - thanks again! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:09, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Betaines

Thanks for help with recent renovation of quat salts used in laundry. I figured if us chemists dont step in, articles on these household apps sound flimsy. So any advice or suggestions are welcome. Now abuot betaines.... Are you sure? Check out http://goldbook.iupac.org/B00637.html. The quat salts that Ullmann's encyclopedia point to are simple cations, not zwittreions, which is what I think betainss are. I did find (in Ullmann's) that betaines are useful in dishwashing agents, which apparently is a higher end market and allows such fancy compounds to be used. The section Dishwashing liquid#Common ingredients is a place I plan to mention them. Here is what Ullmann's has to say about betaines and laundry: "Compounds of the alkylbetaine or alkylsulfobetaine type ... Despite what could be seen in some respects as excellent detergency properties, ... are only rarely employed in laundry detergents, primarily for cost reasons. They are mainly applied in manual dishwashing products." --Smokefoot (talk) 22:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I've only been working in this area for about 12 months, so I may be wrong, but the term 'betaine' does come up a lot (e.g. Cocamidopropyl betaine) with 'betaine ester' often denoting a quat with a cleavage ester linkage (increasingly popular for environmental reasons). Regarding dishwashing, alkyl betaines are often mild biocides, making them appealing for such applications. This may be an issue of an industry term not making the leap into literature - companies don't publish many papers as a rule... or I may be wrong, I don't have access to scopus atm so I can't cite any reviews as evidence - Give me till tomorrow? --Project Osprey (talk) 00:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Take your time. These articles have been without chemical info for several years. I am pretty unfamiliar with the area. --Smokefoot (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Set index articles

FYI: A set index article is not a disambiguation page, its a type of list article and follow the style guidelines at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. :-) Christian75 (talk) 11:44, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm... in that case we may have a problem with Category:Chemistry_set_index_pages. Many of these are functioning as disambiguation pages and have no references. I have myself encountered a problem with other editors who feel that disambiguation pages should say nothing more descriptive than "may refer to". Pages with short leads like "X refers to a class of compounds which containing both Y and Z groups. Important members include:" fall foul of this and get turned into articles; which then collect tags for being unreferenced etc (it can be very hard to find a references for such a general concept). What is the solution for this? --Project Osprey (talk) 12:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
I just checked some random articles i category:Set indices - same problem. In the future I will just ignore SIA without references, and "pretend" its a disabiguation page. Another problem. If we threat them as List articles, most of them would be deleted after a WP:AfD. Sorry for the interruption. Christian75 (talk) 12:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
No problem. (if this issue with SIA is common should we propose a change to their definition?). --Project Osprey (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Unhelpful edit by unapproved bot?

If you're going to run a bot, you must seek to get it approved. this edit (edit summary: "ref fixes (semi-automated using reFill)") deleted useful information from the citation. If it's not a bot, please take more care.--Elvey(t•c) 17:19, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. I just use the bot, I didn't build it. It is hosted on Wikimedia Labs, so I presume it's been approved by someone. The edit appears to have improved 3 refs but damaged 1, which is not ideal. I'll try to be more careful in future. --Project Osprey (talk) 08:23, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 4-Hydroxy-TEMPO, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radical. 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) 09:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your collegiality

I dont typically sem-revert my colleagues, so I dont know what got into me this AM - not enough coffee, assertiveness hormones over-secreted, ... But in any case we're all trying to do the right thing. If you feel that my edits are bungled, you should always feel free to revert me. I will be offended for a few seconds and then fully recover. Thanks, --Smokefoot (talk) 22:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not a problem, I don't typically un-revert my colleagues either. I can have strong opinions regarding leads but what is and isn't an encyclopedic tone is often a matter of personal precision; I'm aware that I prefer a more conversational tone than most. In any event that page seems to have attracted a lot of editing recently so both of our work is probably going to get buried under subsequent edits. --Project Osprey (talk) 23:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Project_Osprey/Archive_2&oldid=1190239474"