User talk:Smokefoot

2450: 3531:

acylium intermediate. Second, for acyl substitution (the traditional meaning) that occurs under "basic" vs "acidic" mechanisms. That latter is a useful distinction, because it avoids conflating Brønsted–Lowry concepts with the key "nucleophilic attack" (strong enough Lewis base even if not strong B–L base). But I don't usually hear the acid-catalyzed variant called "electrophilic acyl substition". And it's all a continuum anyway...all you need is "enough" reactivity from any combination of nucleophile and electrophile, and either or both can be pre-activiated.

1448: 2809: 2059: 3035:

publishers are in that market because it it lucrative (and somewhat generic). We wiki-editors rarely pay much attention to these sources, it seems. Also, chemists and wiki-editors pay little attention to the publishing house, but to the authors. For more advanced topics, such as inorganic (my area), organic, analytical, biochem, pchem .... there are iconic authors/books in US-Canada, and different iconic sources in UK, and yet another set in Western Europe.--

3097: 2496: 3368: 3297: 3226: 2945: 2848: 2738: 2380: 2282: 1594: 1523: 1376: 1305: 1234: 1163: 1092: 971: 900: 829: 758: 687: 616: 545: 474: 399: 328: 257: 186: 2235: 1719: 2008: 2124:(which is larger than twice of the English article in size) and nominated it as a Featured Article there. I plan to translate sections from that article to English and nominate the English article for Good Article status. It can require complete rewriting of sections but I don't it'll be an issue since I already have material to add. What do you think? 3341: 3412: 873: 802: 1349: 731: 1638: 589: 660: 1015: 944: 3667:{{cite journal |first1=Ellen B. |last1=Foot |first2=Virginia |last2=Apgar |author-link2=Virginia Apgar |first3=Kingsley |last3=Bishop |title=Tetrachlorethylene as an Anesthetic Agent |journal=] |date=May 1943 |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=283–292 |s2cid=70969652 |doi=10.1097/00000542-194305000-00009 |doi-access=free}}</ref: --> 2989: 2892: 2782: 1278: 1136: 3270: 2424: 2326: 1207: 447: 372: 3787:

reactive and it causes cancer in humans because it reacts with biochemicals, tetrachloroethylene is mostly unreactive in human body and there is no proof that its metabolites cause cancer either. N-Nitrosodimethylamine mostly causes cancer from DNA damage. Tetrachloroethylene and its metabolites do not damage the DNA.

301: 1567: 230: 1424: 518: 3846:

They do have something in common: none of them are banned. Very rarely are chemicals banned; it is their use, manufacture, and distribution in commerce that have restrictions placed on them which make them less feasible to use than alternatives. This is typically done through the U.S. EPA's authority

3831:

I concede to Zefr who has the appropriate publications. Arguing that government labs are biased or incompetent is a non-starter (or even stupid), because if that it true, we are in anarchy. Also editors then become self-appointed experts, which is also very bad. Necatorina, your one consolation is

3786:

Hydrazine is extremely toxic and is only handled by professionals in PPE, you can use tetrachloroethylene at home with no protection and be fine. Tetraethyllead causes brain damage from lead poisoning, I don't remember anything with cancer, it's not a chlorinated compound either. Formaldehyde is very

3626:

After the recent edits, I am convinced that some American governmental organisation is somehow involved in this article to portray the chemical as a "toxin". US EPA and CDC aren't much reliable in toxicity matters, they are government organisations. Using American governmental/state sources should be

3548:

Thanks for the perspective. My agenda, to some extent, is to minimize article titles that do not correspond to recognized terms. I mean, we kinda know what nucleophilic acyl substitution would be, as you imply, but no one uses that term. This agenda is part of a broader agenda that Knowledge often

2640:

does indeed note "When used as a reagent in organic synthesis to convert carboxylic acids to their methyl esters, trimethylsilyldiazomethane undergoes acid-catalysed methanolysis, forming diazomethane in situ.". I think I only made diazomethane once, just cookbooking with Aldrich's kit to avoid boom.

3757:

If it's so bad, why is it still widely used in most first world countries? Is the dry cleaning industry trying give us all cancer... or maybe it isn't bad at all? No, no it really is very carcinogenic and neurotoxic, why would governments lie to us? I stand corrected. I hope Necatorina listens to us

2190:

In the TR article, I addressed the toxicity and possible carcinogenicity of PCE. I clarified the IARC classification with comparison to another materials classified 2A ("probably carcinogenic to humans") such as red meat and hot beverages (which the readers would be exposed on a nearly daily basis),

2158:

Some editors attracted to the FA nomination will know little chemistry but such outsiders tend to be chemophobic (and chemo-ignorant). So, it will be important to document that it is not so awful. One of the main reasons that it is popular as cleaning agent is that it is nontoxic. Unlike soap and

1662:

Hello Smokefoot; I was passing by this redirect that did not look wholly correct to me, and wanted to ask whether the missing closing bracket on this redirect was intentional? No redirect currently exists with the closing-parenthesis, so this could possibly be moved there if that was the intention.

3530:

I've seen "nucleophilic acyl substitution" used only in two contexts, both to emphasize one variant of acyl substution vs another. First, as the two-step addition–elimination mechanism (what everyone usually just calls "acyl substition") from Friedel–Crafts or similar mechanisms that go through an

3148:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

3034:

I am not an expert on this matter but here are some perspectives. In terms of money-making, there is intense competition for high school and introductory college chemistry texts. My recollection is that the top sellers have something like 4-5% market share, i.e. there are a lot of choices. Many

3665:

Hey, I am a big fan of Zefr, but I dont agree with him on this issue. Here is a quote from the current article "As an anthelmintic, tetrachloroethylene was given orally to approximately fifty thousand people between 1925 and 1943. The most severe side effects were nausea and vomiting due to the

3696:

It's not only limited to tetrachloroethylene, there's a hate/fear mongering towards organochlorides and also chlorine itself. Government organisations, institutions and mainstream media amplify it. People would rather believe what higher-ups ("respected organisations") say than to do their own

3197:

The GAR process disproportionally affects a few editors. The original editors that chose to invest in the Good Article Nomination are often not around. The issues are rarely copyediting and mostly things that require a breadth of knowledge on the topic and time to find or reread references. The

3329: 3816:

This is the worst whataboutism I've read in a while. None of the chemicals you listed have anything in common with tetrachloroethylene. While there's toxicological difference between chlorinated solvents, how can you give unrelated compounds as examples? There's no solid proof that

3400: 3467:

I dont think that ester hydrolysis requires the term nucleophilic acyl substitution. But maybe I should reinstate a simple article on the topic. The previous version was so redundant with respect to many articles we have on esters, amides, acyl chlorides. Your thoughts

2579:

Although I have made diazomethane a couple of times, its chemistry always perplexed me. Apparently it can be lithiated. And then there is tmsCHN2 which somehow gives the same products as diazomethane. I guess that its ability to methylate involves protonation to give

861: 790: 3634:

This chemical has been widely used for over 70 years. if it was as bad as people insist, it would have been banned already. The chemical safety standards were way worse than it's now and even then, carbon tetrachloride's use lasted less than perc. As a recent example,

3190:? Is it the worst GA in the Elements? Easiest to fix? Random? I think the reviews could start with a standard header explaining the positive case for such reviews, eg "To maintain quality across Knowledge random/periodic/regular/occasional reassessments are applied to 1337: 719: 1626: 577: 648: 1003: 932: 1947:. Of course, it is. But as the named elements were no links, the reason why the compounds are related remaines to the not to much fact based reader rather obscure. I changed the names of the elements into links. I hope the contribution now is able to please you. 2977: 2412: 1266: 3258: 2880: 2770: 2314: 1195: 435: 1124: 360: 289: 1555: 3817:

tetrachloroethylene causes cancer, there's no logical mechanism for that. I'm not denying the negative effects such as strong anaesthetic effect upon and environmental controversy, just tetrachloroethylene isn't carcinogenic and it has low toxicity.

1068:. So what would one cite, a source for the populations of these states? As for New York state having few well-endowed public universities, that info is provided by NACUBO, and their data are reproduced in the table. Let me know what you think. -- 218: 1412: 506: 3508:

the only review that has that term in its title "Molecular design of novel activated carboxylic acid derivatives for nucleophilic acyl substitution" By: Imai, Yoshio; Ueda, Mitsuru, Yuki Gosei Kagaku Kyokaishi (1981), 39(4), 312-21 | Language:

3711:

Government organizations are among the highest standard of sourcing in mainstream science and on Knowledge, especially for medical topics like toxicity of chemicals implicated as carcinogens and dangerous to mothers and children. See

3742:

on tetrachloroethylene toxicity. The chemical is obviously on the radar for consumer protection, health advisories, and need for more research - proving high morbidity for a toxic substance is obviously not easy research to do.

3325: 1705: 3396: 857: 786: 1800: 1333: 715: 1622: 573: 644: 2348:

Good day Smookfoot. I know you're not a fan of this article as FA because you're not a fan of classifications within chemistry. That said, I'm asking all the folks who commented on FAC #8, and that includes you.

999: 928: 3549:

has too many articles on overlapping subjects. Overlap is inevitable and even desirable, but eventually its too much. And thank you for tidying up some of my work post- nucleophilic acyl substitution, as in the

2973: 2876: 2766: 2221: 1262: 1777:

but did not fully develop the topic. As you know, the main namespace is not for drafts. You could have used a user sandbox for this. Knowledge is not the wild west that it might have been twenty years ago.

1120: 3254: 2408: 2310: 1191: 431: 2491:

and a negative charge somewhere (carbon preferably). My old copy of March tells me that aliphatic diazonium compounds are highly unstable - though admittedly that is a relative concept in this instance.

2601:. Apparently the explosive limits reported in the literature varied too much for his liking, so he conducted his own studies at a multi-kilo scale (on a military site), so as to be sure. Made a big bang. 356: 285: 1551: 1037:

The last edit states, "New York is one of the few populous states without a public university with a large endowment." The statement is only correct in the context of the NACUBO list, and it ignores

214: 1408: 1993: 502: 2461:

article? I'm curious why would one associate Galvanic corrosion with a Magnesium process. Maybe you see an idea floating around in the aether that needs enunciation and then development. Cheers,

3438:" in particular might not merit an article (it's arguable whether this specific mech has enough to stand apart from a unified discussion with the acidic/electrophilic variant). But for example 3732: 1707: 1656: 1032: 1738: 3186:

regarding the GAR process started by @Z1720. I'm starting to get the hang of them. I don't have anything in principle against quality reviews but the GAR process is very mysterious. Why

3055:

Hello. Can I copy the tables and instructions for the chemical formula template on your user page to use in my user subpage (in another language wiki)? I find it very useful. Thanks.

2038: 2254: 3578: 1806: 2187:

You can check out the Turkish article via a translator program, it can give you an idea of what I've written. I did an extensive research on its history and old nomenclature.

2211: 2129: 1818: 3145: 3122: 3090: 1763: 3085: 1077: 3763: 1059: 1049: 2267: 2207: 2141: 2125: 3668:" The opening paragraph relies on a 1950's source. And if this stuff were so bad, you can be sure that environmentalists would be marching in the streets. -- 2162:

Nonetheless, it could be useful to find info on biodegradation pathways and rates. I am sure that many dry cleaners dumped a lot of this stuff into the ground.

2076: 3287: 2597:

I once worked with a guy who developed an industrial process that used it. His OPR&D paper is in the diazomethane article (though not by my hand) - He had

3198:

formal, full-process critique of the article somehow seems more damning than the same comment on the article's Talk page. And the normal rule on Knowledge of

3728: 3772:

I dont know, why is hydrazine still legal? "Tetra ethyl death" as some in the industry call it? Formaldehyde? N-Nitrosodimethylamine? Get over yourselves

1948: 3639:

was introduced into dry cleaning as an alternative to perc but its use didn't even last 20 years because of its toxicity (nPB wasn't even too toxic).

1924:. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 1621:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1550:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1407:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1332:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1261:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1190:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 1119:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 998:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 927:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 856:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 785:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 714:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 643:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 572:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 501:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 430:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 355:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 284:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 213:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 3395:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

3324:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

3253:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

2972:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

2875:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

2765:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

2407:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

2309:

error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (

1466: 3353: 3183: 2622:

I don't really understand why you can't just make it in-situ the same way you make all the other diazo compounds: methylamine, nitrite and acid?

819: 3172: 3358: 1472:

Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Knowledge’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.

1864:

Yikes, that was indeed poor. I removed it from other-languages' Knowledge articles, and it will be deleted altogether off Commons next week.

1508: 748: 3867:

Thank you very much. Your explanation really helps one understand, a substance is not so much "banned", but you cant do anything with it.--

2111: 885: 3853:

Yes, it is expected that restrictions on PCE that some people colloquially consider to be a 'ban' will happen soon in the United States.

3424: 2561:

is such a weak acid, given how selective diazomethane is for being protonated by various acid groups and the usual route for lab-prep of

1295: 3848: 3682:

Why are people pushing the narrative that tetrachloroethylene is toxic and carcinogenic? From what I have read, it is simply uncertain.

814: 2081: 677: 1361: 3153:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the 1584: 743: 535: 1650: 601: 3727:(which is on the CDC's website, so apparently approved and endorsed by the national disease center), and tetrachloroethylene is on 3461:

Ok point taken. For the majority of the cases, "nucleophilic acyl substitution" seems to be jargon that would inhibit readability.

2133: 2090: 2021:

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Knowledge! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

672: 606: 3126: 2181: 1027: 956: 2353: 1655: 961: 890: 1064:

I was intrigued by the earlier request for a RS, but it seems that the information provided by my addition is common knowledge,

3313: 3289: 3086: 2106: 1441: 3001: 2904: 2794: 1290: 3882: 3854: 3773: 3012: 1504: 1148: 3282: 3211: 2436: 2338: 2093:

as a separate page would be a good solution, referring to all CYP genes of a particular species or population? Meanwhile,

1684: 1462:

is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.

1219: 459: 3781: 3666:

gastric tract irritation. Most reported poisonings were manifestations of its narcotic effects.<ref name=foot1943: -->

3439: 384: 3862: 3826: 3759: 3392: 3321: 3250: 3177: 2969: 2915: 2872: 2762: 2404: 2306: 2245: 2227: 1884: 1729: 1711: 1618: 1547: 1404: 1329: 1258: 1187: 1116: 995: 924: 853: 782: 711: 640: 569: 498: 427: 352: 313: 281: 210: 3890: 3876: 3720:

where national guidelines (i.e., governments and clinical agencies) are among the highest quality of medical sourcing.

2930: 2631: 2552: 2530: 1579: 3577: 2935: 2838: 2728: 1933: 1901: 1224: 1896: 242: 3706: 3593: 3044: 2574: 1987: 1436: 1082: 105: 100: 95: 90: 85: 80: 75: 70: 65: 60: 55: 50: 45: 40: 35: 3841: 3691: 3677: 3079: 2215: 1832:, but please be careful not to use a misleading edit summary. Your summary referred only to changing a reference. 1795: 3525: 3216: 2909: 2470: 2370: 2272: 2050: 2029: 1995: 1500: 1153: 530: 389: 1956: 3767: 3435: 3384: 3360: 1873: 3562: 3543: 3017: 2660: 2592: 1724: 1699: 3752: 3648: 1400: 845: 821: 774: 750: 423: 318: 30: 25: 20: 2449: 2045:

Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

3106: 2716: 2692: 2678: 2223: 2046: 2025: 1892: 1856: 1756: 1677: 1038: 247: 3724: 3481: 2515: 1513: 1321: 1297: 1053: 3616: 2830: 1807:

User talk:Jwdietrich2#Like recent specialized publications on topics one doesnt understand? Try these on

164: 3455: 3150: 2637: 1978:

are just heavier members there in." is just inappropriate. Happy editing and keep up the good work. --

703: 679: 3155: 2240: 3849:

https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-perchloroethylene-pce

3739: 3534:

So I agree that we probably don't need a stand-alone article on the basic (or nucleophilic) variant.

2365: 2165:

Although not combustible, we might look for its reactions upon incineration (inevitably HCl and CO2).

1610: 1586: 561: 537: 176: 3064: 1044:

While the statement on smaller populations is true, my minor concern is the subtle implication of a

152: 3886: 3858: 3777: 3420: 3349: 3278: 3113: 3028: 2997: 2900: 2821:

Smokefoot is very friendly to new users and spreads the knowledge of citation and image addition.

2790: 2627: 2548: 2511: 2441: 2432: 2334: 1938: 1921: 1787: 1646: 1575: 1432: 1366: 1357: 1286: 1215: 1144: 1023: 952: 881: 810: 739: 668: 632: 608: 597: 526: 455: 380: 309: 238: 1851: 3598: 3380: 3309: 3238: 2957: 2860: 2750: 2392: 2294: 2094: 1888: 1768: 1606: 1535: 1388: 1317: 1246: 1175: 1104: 987: 983: 963: 916: 912: 892: 841: 770: 699: 628: 557: 486: 411: 340: 269: 198: 3621: 3191: 2799: 2604:

Single carbon compounds always seem to have anomalous properties, often usefully. The aqueous p

2466: 464: 3207: 3025: 2097:

can be used to store more information about enzyme architecture and machinery and mechanism.

1952: 1944: 1878: 1814: 139: 1048:. With that said, the entire paragraph could probably benefit from another citation or two. 3822: 3702: 3687: 3644: 3429: 3134: 3060: 2927: 2072: 1917:. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while. 1774: 1739:

Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 3 § Nitrilotris(methylenephosphonic acid

8: 3717: 3550: 3416: 3372: 3345: 3301: 3274: 3230: 3168: 2993: 2949: 2896: 2852: 2786: 2742: 2623: 2544: 2507: 2500: 2428: 2384: 2330: 2286: 2121: 2113: 1857: 1781: 1642: 1598: 1571: 1527: 1480: 1428: 1380: 1353: 1309: 1282: 1238: 1211: 1167: 1140: 1096: 1019: 975: 948: 904: 877: 833: 806: 762: 735: 691: 664: 620: 593: 549: 522: 478: 451: 403: 376: 332: 305: 261: 234: 190: 1486:

If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider

2666: 2343: 2249: 2102: 1733: 1487: 2535:

Apologies. The image was correct, it was the caption that was wrong. See this review (

2453:

Galvanic corrosion can occur on underground pipelines, water tanks and storage heaters

3202:

does not apply. I think these are some of the reasons the process is often resented.

3199: 3130: 2961: 2937: 2864: 2840: 2754: 2730: 2462: 2203:

I will do the translation, but I might need help on formatting (esp. the citations).

1929: 1823: 1250: 1226: 3832:

that tetrachloroethylene is still widely used and is not about to be banned soon. --

3713: 3636: 3539: 3451: 3203: 3022: 2712: 2688: 2674: 2656: 2612: 2570: 2536: 2483:

This is an old image of yours and it's currently states that the final compound is

2361: 2263: 1910: 1902: 1869: 1829: 1810: 1750: 1671: 1465:

We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the

1108: 1084: 127: 3574:

The only time I hear It's definitely not an exactly-defined phrase in textbooks .

2583:

I reverted the image so that it gives methyldiazonium. The JOC paper is useful.--

1801:

Like recent specialized publications on topics one doesnt understand? Try these on

3818: 3698: 3683: 3656: 3640: 3589: 3242: 3218: 3056: 2919: 2826: 2704: 2558: 2458: 2396: 2372: 2298: 2274: 2255:

Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 21 § Potassium heptafluoroniobate

2146:

I will try to support your efforts. Here are my initial comments on the article:

2083: 2068: 2058: 1967: 1179: 1155: 415: 391: 3149:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

2650: 1913:. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because 3868: 3833: 3748: 3669: 3628: 3612: 3554: 3517: 3473: 3408: 3337: 3266: 3164: 3160: 3071: 3036: 2985: 2888: 2778: 2669:

provides an alternative TMSCHN2 mechanism. Someone should update our article:)

2584: 2522: 2475: 2420: 2322: 2173: 1979: 1842: 1691: 1634: 1563: 1420: 1345: 1274: 1203: 1132: 1069: 1011: 940: 869: 798: 727: 656: 585: 514: 443: 368: 297: 226: 3407: