User talk:Hezimmerman/Archive 1

3619:: the "More hindered, blocked" and "less hindered, preferred" labels are floating pretty far from the structure (actually one renders closer to the image below it). Could they move closer to the p orbital about which they are talking? Or maybe just vectors for the approach, labeled "a" and "b", with descriptions of what they mean in the article? Having English text makes it harder to reuse these images in other languages. Also, having lots text annotation makes the image cluttered and harder to reuse in other contexts (and scales poorly for .gif). There is actually a lot of vertical whitespace that could be tightened, and the "down" reaction-arrows shortened, which would make the whole image smaller. *General format of images: .png is usually preferable to .gif for these types of diagrams if your ChemDraw supports it. 2725:

all fields of science, in which 49 organic chemists were included, 1981 Election to National Academy of Sciences, 1980 Halpern Award for Photochemistry awarded by the New York Academy of Sciences, 1980 One of the 250 Most Cited Primary Authors in all fields of science, in which 31 organic chemists were included, 1977 James Flack Norris Award for Physical-Organic Chemistry of the ACS, 1976 First Award for Photochemistry of the Northeast ACS Section, 1971 Chittenden Award, Yale, 1950 Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma XI, 1948 Best wishes, Howard Howard E. Zimmerman 02:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

2676:(User:Chzz Talk) but am guessing that it was a new page. Thus this message. I'll work further to see I need and have more links. Best wishes, Howard Howard E. Zimmerman 22:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC) To: Chzz From: Howard Z I now have links which should cover all of the awards. Some different ones cover the same award. But the best one is last and I just discovered it. It is the Chemistry Department official listing of all awards in the Department. It has awards going back to 1950 and earlier. It must have been started a very long time ago. In any case the list of Links is: 2421:

ask him for an opinion. I noted one suggestion of moving the article to the Main space but am concerned about it not being understood or appreciated and then deleted. What I need is having some organic and/or physical-organic chemists evaluating it. Do give me your opinions. Howard Howard E. Zimmerman 16:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC) :I will check over it for typos and respond further soon. :Re. asking for help - of course; ask for help from anyone. :Re. concern over moving it - I will let you know when I have checked it over. :I will write more here, soon.

2644:

you working on something in a lab, or delivering a talk, or whatever. You could also assist in two other ways; *Do you know if there are specific references for the 'awards' - ie websites that list them? It may be that we can only 'prove' some of the awards, and we may have to remove others *Could you provide me with a list of the most important papers and books that you have published or contributed to? Not too many; perhaps 10 or so, and please give full details (ISSN/ISBN, publisher, date, etc)

3134:; as you know, Knowledge keeps a record of all edits to all pages. When their histories of two pages are merged together, it means that all the edits to both are combined. We need to keep the history to preserve the information on who added what. From what I can tell, it seems that all of the work that you did has been merged in. I see that you are editing it, so that's great. There is discussion on the talk page, and that is the place to comment on ideas, etc. You 2797:. For an article of this size, it should be at least a couple of paragraphs - no new information, but just a summary of the whole thing. Apart from those two points, I think that it should be made live. Don't worry about others modifying it - for a start, the older versions will still be stored in the page history. And who knows, they may be able to help make it better. I can understand your concern over it being changed, but that is indeed how Knowledge works - no 2453:- see that links. The lede should be an overview of what the entire article is about, preferably in clear, plain English. :*After that, the remainder of the article should be separated into sensible == Section headings == (with that code). A section should normally be about 2-4 paragraphs. It is also possible to add === Subsections === if you wish. :*It really needs lots more in-line references. I am concerned that much of the information contained is 1498: 31: 1317: 792: 1914: 1410: 1062: 909: 670: 3714: 3442: 3242: 2996: 1873: 1219: 2445:::Some comments; :*You do not need a 'title', ie "The Birch Reduction, Mechanistic and Historical Aspects". When the page is live, the actual name of the page will be the title - presumably it will be "Birch Reduction (something)" with the 'something' being to distinguish it from the existing article. Whatever the title is, the name should be in 3285:- which is at least a little more off-the-beaten-track, but of course is still open for anyone to see. I think I understand your concerns, and yes - talking to others is always a good idea; an apology never does any harm. Just keep things like that on user talk pages, but discuss content issues on the 3410:

Generally, it is a very bad idea to write articles that are near your research. All sorts of problems occur. There are many, many articles on basic organic chemistry that are heavily consulted that would benefit from a pro like you. So if your incentive here is to do good, (vs self-promotion), then

2818:

04:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC) :The reason that I suggested possible merge is, if that isn't done, it's quite likely that someone else will do so in the future - if it covers the same topic area. If the existing article is indeed only 10% correct, then that is the only part we would want to preserve from

2675:

I had sent a group of links for a number of the awards and will check further. But then I realized I had neglected to mention that I had uploaded a Picture (as requested). It should be labeled HEZ Picture and is in .gif format and in Commons. I just mentioned this in what I thought was your Talk page

2643:

I have started working on this, and will continue to do so, as time permits - it may take a while, but I'll keep at it, between other things. Do you have an appropriate photo that we could add? ideally a 'headshot', and reasonably recent - and/or any other particularly relevant pictures, such as e.g.

1774:

The article has the Correct Mechanism, Descripition, and Correct References for the Birch Reduction. The present article in Knowledge is terribly incomplete and doesn't deal with the correct mechanism and doesn't give up-to-date references. Arthur Birch over the years wandered back and forth between

2420:

13:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC) To: Chzz From: Howard Z Chzz, I have the article looking quite nice. I can have someone here go over it to look for typo's. Also sometime back Brian Salter-Duke was helping a bit and had an interest in the Birch stuff becaue of Birch being in Australia where BDuke is. I can

1964:

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 Knowledge's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page

1468:

1124:

971:

720:

3289:

discussion page instead. As I said, using some or even all of the material from a Knowledge article within a publication is absolutely fine; the only condition being that, if you copy a large chunk from Knowledge verbatim, you should say that it is copied from Knowledge - this may sound odd, as you

2724:

IUPAC Porter Medal for Photochemical Research Photochemistry, 2006 ACS Arthur C. Cope Scholar Award, 1990 U.W. Hilldale Award in the Physical Sciences 1989 Senior Humboldt Fellowship Award, 1988 Chemical Pioneer Award of the American Institute of Chemists, 1986 One of the 1000 Most Cited Authors in

1892:

working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions

1628:

The Wikiproject chemistry will help you! Several important things you should know befor. I think you would never send a article to JACS without looking into the rules how to write an article and submit it (wiki has a lot of rules how to write). You would also not dare to get into an edit fight with

3138:

publish things that you have written on Knowledge - there is no problem with that. Often, making a really good article is a difficult process - I have had similar experiences myself. It is hard, after working on an article, to 'let go' - when you spend many hours on the work, it does feel like you

2865:

to some other articles that I think may help readers understanding. There isn't a problem just adding the lede section, because it doesn't need references - everything in the lede should be covered in more details in the body text, so references are unnecessary. Please check the wikilinks, and add

2823:

at the top, and remove any prefix; it is currently called "User:Hezimmerman/Birch reduction", and moving it to e.g. "Birch reduction method" would make it live. :Re. "History of the 774th Tank Battalion in WWII", I have no idea if it is free from copyright - the chances are, if it does not clearly

2608:

Per discussions, I have archived everything prior to 2010, and I have set up the page to 'auto-archive' threads that are over 100 days old. You can change that number if you wish - if you edit this page, you will see it, near the top, where it says "|algo = old(100d)". If something has been put in

2347:

21:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC) I'm glad to hear that you have got it mostly sorted out. I did reply to all of your messages, below each one. I did explain about the figures issue too. If you are still having troubles, please ask again. Note, in particular, I wrote this; :Two more things, to make our

1616:

I can supply them but will do that only if requested in view of the concern that they might be biased. They could be used by Editors if wanted. They consist of articles and writings by persons other than me. But I am reluctant to send them without a request. If they are wanted, please give me an

1536:

Howard, I can see that all this must seem very difficult to you. I will try to help. Please go to my user page and click on the email link to the left, and then email me. I am a retired quantum chemist who knows about your book, but I am also an experienced wikipedia editor and administrator on

2001:

I put in a much improved version of my article on the Birch Reduction and uploaded six drawing which go into it. But I seem able to only access the earlier version of the article which is in my user space and I don't have access to the six drawings to put into the new version.

2613:

page, otherwise people are unlikely to see them. Apart from archiving, one message predates our recent discussions (we have now covered those points), and the other was about the use of more references - which I think will be an issue for resolution as the article develops.

2008:

I would really like to replace the old article with the new one once I have been able to transfer one table which took some time to format properly in the old version. The new version of the article is expanded now to include all aspects of interest to the Birch Reduction.

1770:

I've finally put in an Article on the "Birch Reduction". It is on my Talk Page (which should be temporary until I get the two drawings put in). I have drawings in .gif and .cdx format but can get most formats. However, I don't seem to be able to paste the drawings in.

1002:

From your comments on the article talk page, it sounded like you meant this to be your userpage. I have moved it accordingly. It, as written - a straight CV, was not appropriate as an article. If I can explain further, or help you at all, please let me know.

2012:

There is a Birch article which is laden with errors and limitations. I have a file documenting this. Beyond that, the current article doesn't deal with regioselectivity, the reasons for the reaction going as it does and the problem of central protonation.

2648:

Please do not edit the article yourself, directly - because we will then have the same 'autobiography' issues. Feel free to make suggestions though. Otherwise, I'll continue to try and improve it, so that eventually those tags can go from the top. Cheers,

1716:? Or if you could help sketch out any information about allied tankers with especially distinguished combat records (ie. those Knowledge would consider notable)? I've been trying to build allied tanker bio articles for a while now, with a rather sketchy 1365:

You have been told 3 times that you cannot just post a CV as a Knowledge article; it must be written in prose. I don't want to request a block, as it seems you are a notable subject, but you continue edit warring I will have no choice but to request one.

2693: 3735:

located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you.

3463:

3263:

3017:

1636:

Conflict of interest and self promotion are a problem here on wikipedia and therefore the rules are hard and most of the time it is thought apropriate that you never start a article on yourself, because if you are notable somebody else will start one

2352:

checked. :*When you make sections here (to leave messages), could you keep the title short? The long titles make it a bit unwieldy in the table of contents etc. :Neither are a huge problem; just trying to make things easier. Hope to hear more

2348:

lives easier; :*Please fix your signature, so it stops doing this 'unsigned comments' thing. To do that, click on 'my preferences', clear anything in the "Signature:" box, and make sure that the checkbox " Sign my name exactly as shown" is

1076:, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 923:, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 1845:

Howard, I will work on getting your material into place in the Birch Reduction article but I am a bit busy right now. Email me the diagrams and I'll check them before you upload them. The subpage is the best place for your draft. Regards,

1966: 1470: 1126: 973: 722: 1334:

prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the

3419:) 15:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC) :I saw your response. Regarding your statement "With respect to fixing up articles already written, ... At present there are not that many organic and physical-organic articles in Knowledge." There are 3143:

the article, and this is a frequent problem on Knowledge. I've spent many hours working on something, only to have others chop it to pieces - and my initial reaction was similar to your own. However, after some time, the article

1025:

It sounds like you are Howard E. Zimmerman, and you intend to write a Knowledge article about yourself. This is not explicitly forbidden, and at first glance, Mr. Zimmerman appears to meet the criteria for inclusion outlined at

3606: 2019:

In any case, I need help in locating the article I submitted today and also locating the six drawings. If some kindly editor were willing to put the drawings in place, of course that would be helpful. Otherwise I can do that.

2683:

The best link is the Chemistry Department Pages which list all of the Chemistry Faculty Awards. One needs to search through them by years. The IAPS Newsletter reporting the Porter Medal Award; also some ‘bio” (Tank stuff)

3065:

Hi Howard, if you put {{db-u1}} (including the braces) at the top of the pages that you want deleted from your userspace, an administrator will delete them for you. (That does not go for your talk page, just so you know.)

1723:

I do understand that on Knowledge, personal recollections are not considered a reliable source and should not be used in articles, but recollections can serve as pointers to things that are considered as reliable sources.

1424:, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read 752:

in to the mainspace and I took a look at the text in question. Unfortunately general CV's are not considered good article material. I suggest you take a look at the Welcome message above, specifically links related to

2537:

Note, I am not saying that every article needs to live up to such standards - just that, by looking at them, you will gain an insight for layout and requirements. You can always click 'edit' and see how they do things.

2694:

http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=1319&content_id=CTP_004536&use_sec=true&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=7362f686-c52e-4c2e-b38d-8e8cd5053b38

3820: 3177:; the previous version was called "File:Fig 3 Cyclohexadienyl-Anion.gif" and the newer one "File:Fig 3 Cyclohexadienyl Anion.gif" - notice the dash. I will get the old one removed, and sort out Commons, etc. Cheers, 3856:; I inquired with admins from that wiki, and they have now changed that setting. I do not know how often Google checks these things; it could be several days before it disappears, but I think that it will. Best, 1643:

Do not push your point of view, most of the time a group of people gethers to oppose. Even if you are partly right and you are a professor does not ensure that after discussion your point of view will survive.

3694:

I was wondering if I could be assistance for correcting some of the web pages. You seem to have a list of edits that require attention in some of the articles. I was asked by the editors of wiki to provide

2789:, but is there any possible way that the two could be merged together? If they cannot, then we would have to use a different name for the new article *Could you possibly expand and change the first part, the 1633:

Knowledge does not care who you are. If you are professor, the president or a pupil in a gramar school the credibility comes with work on the articles. Everybody has to give references to credible sources.

1588:. I realize that a lot of primary literature is already cited in Knowledge, but many such journal references will eventually be replaced by broader sources. Broader sources are admittedly more demanding. 2609:

the archive that you would prefer not to be, I can move it back; just let me know. I found your message about it, and 2 other messages, on my user page - please note, you should only leave messages on a

2967: 1192: 3849: 3290:

wrote most of it, but that is just why we ask for the credit - if you do publish, and mention the Knowledge article, anyone wishing to check would see that "user:Hezummerman" had written it. See

3623:

has some other guidelines. *Very minor: in your image descriptions, you list the date with the annotation "(i.e. today)". That's hard-coded, so now it's May 25 and it says "May 24 (today)".

2215:

Further to our conversation, you left the chat; anyway - I noticed that the picture would not work, because you also had the filename wrong - so I fixed it. The exact code I inserted was;

3311:

02:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC) :Hi. no, my userspace is not private; no pages on Knowledge are private. :If users have enabled it in their preferences, you can email them - I have, and it is

3035:

Hi there. I read your messages yesterday, and wish that I had had the time to respond before the merger was proposed - but still, here we are now. I have therefore added my comments on

2485:- the word 'interestingly' is not appropriate; it is an opinion, not a fact. :*Currently, it is written in rather technical language; it needs to be clarified, for non-experts. Adding 3620: 2785:

Hello again. I think that it would be good to make the article live as soon as possible, but with a couple of considerations; *I understand your comments about the existing article

2403:

You created a page, "User talk:Chzz/help/refs" (now deleted) - messages need to go on my talk page, otherwise I am unlikely to find them. The message follows, and I will reply here.

1234:

policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should

2165:

Use a {{helpme}} - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~ at the end;

3423:

Many need simple corrections about mechanism, structure, technique, and bonding. Simple stuff requiring a modicum of breadth and an ability to refrain from citing oneself. --

3848:

Hi there. Re. the Google page - I think the problem is fixed, but it may be some time before Google re-indexes things. The page itself is from the "Simple English Knowledge -

209: 2866:

more, if you think they will help. It would also be good if you could consider rephrasing the very first part; the opening sentence is important, and it does need to be

2705: 2716:

Awards listed in Chemistry Cope Scholar, Humboldt, AIC Chem Pioneer, Porter Medal, NAS, Northeast First Award for Photochemistry, Halpern Award of New York Acad. Sci.

1511: 3148:

become much better than anything I could have achieved single-handedly. I really do hope that you will stick with it. Please ask for any assistance, any time. Best,

2819:

it; a 'merge' does not have to be inclusive. :Anyway - good luck with the lede; let me know how you get on with it. :Making it live is very easy - you just click

347: 1775:

the wrong mechanism and an admixture with the correct one. He ignored the early evidence that he was in error. In any case the current article is misleading.

3884: 3852:. On the 'normal' English Knowledge - here - we have a setting to stop Google from looking at the deletion discussions, but that setting was not present on 3500:

User_talk:Chzz#Chzz.2C_thanks_for_the_reference_for_umlauts._I_still_have_a_problem_with_Go_and_Search_for_the_.22M.C3.B6bius-H.C3.BCckel_concept.22_article

1928:

if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the

1884:. While Knowledge welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying 1640:

Add references too your own work is considered problematic and therefore put it onto the talk page of the article and wait for a discussion to start there.

1378:

I have just fixed your latest edit. You wanted a category for the Academy of Sciences, not a reference. You really need to learn the way wikpedia works. --

684:

if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the

79: 3122:

Hi there. I'm sorry that it took me a couple of days to respond to your messages; I've been very busy with some complicated stuff on wikipedia (mostly,

3553:

User talk:Chzz/Archive 22#Chzz, thanks for the reference for umlauts. I still have a problem with Go and Search for the "Möbius-Hückel concept" article

2829: 2309:

18:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC) ::I have replied again - this time, in the part, "Trying to reach Chzz". All replies are directly below the questions.

2046: 391: 175: 117: 2949:

01:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC) user:chzz/tb|Chzz, I typed something and lost the long message I had left before I could Save it; this is shorter}}

2530: 2079: 1903: 1399: 1051: 898: 870: 758: 659: 149: 1920:

Thank you for experimenting with Knowledge. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the

246:

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the

676:

Thank you for experimenting with Knowledge. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use

3291: 2825: 1745: 1727: 1690: 1297: 251: 1566:

1) If you are having trouble with entering references and related content, you can just paste your comments into the Talk pages. e.g.

3547:

As you are probably already aware, my talk page gets busy, so my replies to the above have now been archived - they can be found in; *

2706:

http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=1319&content_id=CTP_004536&

640: 3090:

Hi again Howard, you seem to have it backwards with signing using tildes. You should sign coments on talk pages, such as this one or

2096: 178:

on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out

3424: 3412: 2109: 2070: 574: 213: 179: 2114: 712: 3732: 3378: 2968:

User talk:Chzz#Don't see the Lede in User:hezimmerman/birch reduction; Should I cut and paste it in from User:hezimmerman/Reftest?

3731: 3522: 3460: 3260: 3014: 1831: 243: 2290:

user talk:Chzz#A real problem has developed with the references, also Figure 1 has moved oddly and I can't get it back in place

1504: 1497: 1278: 1231: 888: 874: 618: 387: 365: 2509:. When the title differs from the word that you want to link, you use a pipe symbol in the centre - for example ] displays as 706: 663: 83: 3039:, which I think is the most appropriate case - let's discuss it there with other editors, and see what we can agree. Cheers, 2883: 2526: 2510: 2502: 2134: 1340: 1227: 446: 369: 1573:

2) Referencing one's own work is probably something to be minimized within Knowledge for many reasons. It looks tacky too.

3281:

Hi. No, my talk page is not private - there are no private pages on Knowledge. I moved your last message into my archive,

2119: 2104: 1162:

just post a CV. Please do not do that again. Information given should be in text/paragraph format and include references.

1085: 932: 749: 552: 547: 496: 2760:

Survey - thanks for that. Also, I've seen your notes about the article on you, and the pic - I am working on it. Cheers,

2374:

Due to the volume of posts on my own talk page, the previous discussions and my replies can now be found in an archive -

2378:. Please do not edit that page though - for any new correspondence, please start a new section on my talk page. Thanks, 1925: 1253:

articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;

754: 681: 517: 478: 437: 306: 298: 139: 135:

on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

111: 96: 75: 2689: 3700: 2858: 2441: 2083: 2041: 1929: 1783: 1433: 1336: 1331: 1293: 1089: 936: 862: 803: 781: 685: 632: 483: 403: 315: 2887: 2129: 2124: 866: 614: 508: 500: 420: 416: 399: 378: 87: 38: 1034:

before creating the article. Let me know if you need help or have any questions. Further help may be found at the

3799: 3552: 3548: 3282: 2522: 2375: 1358: 1260: 596: 556: 442: 1712:

I noticed in your biographical article, that you were a tanker in WWII. I was wondering if you knew much about

569: 565: 425: 382: 3823:. Apologies for the orangeness; I'm supporting Holland in the World Cup, being as England failed so miserably. 2735:] - anonymous, and only for research. If you have a few spare minutes, perhaps you could complete it. Cheers, 2289: 2911:

21:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC) Re. Lilly - actually, we're struggling a bit to find information about it - is it

3594: 3108: 3076: 1796: 1749: 1731: 1694: 1301: 1286: 1282: 1205: 1172: 1144: 1031: 1013: 525: 407: 374: 255: 221: 3126:). I can't help much with the detailed technical side of the content; that is a matter for discussion - on 3696: 3374: 3366: 3312: 3194:

01:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC) :Ah, looks like your reply overlapped the above. Should all be OK now. Cheers,

2036: 1970: 1956: 1678: 1474: 1429: 1130: 977: 726: 521: 512: 292: 288: 154: 82:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like 2581:

user talk:Chzz#Received your message (starting with "Displaced Message" and will work on your suggestions

1432:

for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the

3681: 3428: 3416: 2882:- hope you see what I mean. Incidentally, a kind colleague has created a short, starting-off article on 1889: 1717: 1460: 1116: 627: 623: 578: 171: 47: 17: 3555:

Please don't edit those pages though; for new questions, just ask on my talk in a new section. Cheers!

2521:

in the same approximate topic area, to see how a Knowledge article should be presented. Examples are; *

2709: 2228:

Also, I have fixed the formatting of the first two references. I will add help on this below. Cheers,

1222:

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article

963: 843: 3722: 3611:

Great to have experts writing in their field! Couple of notes about the images: *Chemical mistake in

3450: 3250: 3127: 3091: 3036: 3004: 1950: 1907: 1824: 1567: 1081: 928: 450: 412: 237: 2793:- it should summarize the whole article, in as plain English as possible - have a look at the link, 3903: 3718: 3526:- apologies for the bold text; I didn't want to use the usual 'talback' thing, to avoid confusion! 3446: 3246: 3131: 3000: 1670: 1666: 1598: 1585: 1344: 1292:

For information on how to contribute to Knowledge when you have a conflict of interest, please see

878: 854: 831: 604: 600: 491: 474: 433: 342: 1277:

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to

3586: 3100: 3068: 1996: 1788: 1674: 1322: 1197: 1164: 1158:

Hello, please take a look at the article as it is now. You can add more information, but you can

1134: 1027: 1005: 992: 957: 916: 902: 799: 785: 487: 284: 164: 1935:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

1439:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

1095:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

942:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

691:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

3883: 3741: 3469: 3370: 3269: 3023: 2891: 2862: 2490: 2486: 1921: 1713: 1686: 1522: 1482: 839: 811: 770: 738: 677: 610: 543: 247: 191: 3753:

I think I'd already replied to your first message, before you wrote the others; see my reply

761:

for help in creating the article. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks...

3677: 3628: 3612: 2640: 2547: 2494: 1979: 1454: 1417: 1403: 1327: 1223: 1152: 1110: 1069: 1055: 996: 302: 3616: 3615:: the right structure is missing the carbonyl (has methyl not acetyl). *Layout problem in 3362: 3215:. Underscores and spaces are treated as being the same; however. a dash (-) is different. 3095: 2786: 2576:

Received your message (starting with "Displaced Message" and will work on your suggestions

2551: 2534: 2498: 2462: 2172: 2087: 1940: 1881: 1854: 1817: 1765: 1655: 1545: 1444: 1386: 1369: 1100: 1040: 982: 947: 696: 636: 229: 127: 2704:

An ACS link to all its awards including the Cope Scholar one and the James Flack Norris:

2685: 2701: 3929: 3922: 3891: 3873: 3866: 3840: 3833: 3812: 3791: 3777: 3767: 3754: 3745: 3704: 3685: 3669: 3657: 3649: 3632: 3600: 3572: 3565: 3536: 3512: 3499: 3491: 3473: 3432: 3402: 3395: 3353: 3346: 3333: 3325: 3304: 3273: 3232: 3225: 3204: 3187: 3165: 3158: 3114: 3082: 3056: 3049: 3027: 2986: 2979: 2959: 2942: 2925: 2912: 2904: 2867: 2849: 2842: 2820: 2811: 2794: 2790: 2777: 2770: 2752: 2745: 2666: 2659: 2631: 2624: 2600: 2593: 2580: 2571: 2564: 2543: 2466: 2450: 2431: 2413: 2395: 2388: 2363: 2340: 2330:

I have replied to all of your previous messages. Look underneath them, on my talk page.

2319: 2302: 2245: 2238: 2201: 2194: 2156: 2051: 1986: 1897: 1885: 1861: 1837: 1808: 1802: 1753: 1735: 1698: 1659: 1602: 1594: 1552: 1526: 1486: 1425: 1393: 1373: 1305: 1270: 1211: 1178: 1146: 1044: 1019: 986: 892: 882: 774: 742: 561: 429: 337: 259: 195: 121:, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type 2801:. Of course, watch what happens, and discuss any concerns with other editors. Cheers, 1316: 3897:

You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.

3581: 3140: 2798: 2712:

Official University of Wisconsin listing of Awards – All should be accessible there:

2697: 2505:. You add wikilinks by putting the article title within ]; for example ] displays as 2028: 1954:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 1812: 1682: 1458:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 1421: 1114:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 1088:. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the 1077: 1073: 961:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 935:. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the 924: 920: 820: 710:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 333: 311: 159: 144: 2690:

http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/photochem/assets/pdf/spectrum/winter2006spectrum.pdf

2184:

The last of those is particularly useful - please try it; pop in now and say hello.

1030:(others may disagree). However, if my first statement is true, please at least skim 791: 3853: 3737: 3465: 3265: 3123: 3019: 2539: 2518: 2458: 2454: 1894: 1580:. The kinds of references sought are to books ("tertiary sources") or to reviews, 1518: 1478: 1352: 1348: 1035: 762: 730: 183: 1420:, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under 250:

field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing!

95:

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

2871: 2717: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2470: 819:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

3729:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 3624: 3457:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 3257:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 3011:( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 1974: 1741: 1646:

If you want to get a good editor on wikipedia, learn by looking what others do!!

1269:

to the Knowledge article or website of your organization in other articles (see

1072:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

919:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2481:- non-encyclopaedic tone; the article should just state facts - no commentary. 1913: 1409: 1061: 908: 669: 3367:

User talk:Benjah-bmm27#Your Comments about a Minus Sign in the Birch Reduction

2032: 1847: 1651: 1538: 1379: 849:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

3211:

01:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC) ::By the way, I had already fixed it when you did

1629:

the reviwers (here it is the same). This rules are also good for wikipedia.

3915: 3859: 3826: 3805: 3784: 3760: 3662: 3642: 3558: 3529: 3505: 3484: 3388: 3361:

Hi there Prof. Zimmerman, I've replied to your comment about my edit to the

3339: 3318: 3297: 3218: 3197: 3180: 3151: 3042: 2972: 2952: 2935: 2918: 2897: 2835: 2804: 2763: 2738: 2720:

Chemistry Department Listing of Awards (Search manually by Year) 12 Awards:

2652: 2617: 2586: 2557: 2424: 2406: 2381: 2356: 2333: 2312: 2295: 2231: 2187: 2176: 1877: 2095:

Similarly, you can find files that you added to commons by looking at your

3607:

Stereochemistry of Ketonization of Enols and Enolates; Kinetic Protonation

2721: 2713: 2708:

NEW A link to the EPA newsletter giving the Porter Award and other stuff:

2005:

In the article I have noted in italics where each of the six drawings go.

1347:

among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek

3850:

Simple:Knowledge:Requests for deletion/Requests/2009/Howard E. Zimmerman

3523:

User talk:Chzz#Chzz, thanks. I've learned something (minus sign vs dash)

3441: 3241: 2995: 1872: 1782:

I have moved your draft article into your userspace. You can find it at

1218: 3459: 3259: 3013: 2732: 2700:

The link to Yale’s description of prizes including the Chittenden one:

2506: 2457:, which is not permitted. Only facts that have been presented in other 1562:

Here are some unofficial comments on working with Knowledge-Chemistry:

242: 3584:, only the first letter of a section header should be capitalized. -- 2279:

b) A section called "References" with the special code "{{reflist}}";

748:

Hello, Hezimmerman, I saw you comment that you are unable to move an

2710:

http://www.photochemistry.eu/newsletter/EPA_NEWSLETTER_dec_2006.pdf

1263:

about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and

109:

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called

3726: 3454: 3254: 3008: 2731:

A new user asked for help in getting some Wikipedians to complete

2471:

It has been a matter of intense interest to understand reaction...

1893:

of the subject of articles nor are such pages a forum. Thank you.

1609:

A list of impartial links and references is available but I may be

236:

on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to

2016:

Thus eventually, my article would replace the current Birch one.

1880:! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, 1339:. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to 25: 461: 271: 203: 115:. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the 3882: 2824:

say that it is, then it isn't. If you want to check, ask on

1960: