User talk:Pdavis68

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * If you're a Wikipedian, see Wikibooks for Wikipedians for a primer on how things work here (it's a little different).
 * If you want to base your work here on materials from Wikipedia, please use WB:RFI to bring the material over in compliance with the GFDL.
 * If you're an instructor and plan on using wikibooks for a class project, see Guidelines for class projects
 * Please say hello at the Staff Lounge with any questions or ideas.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Please take a look at Naming policy before starting a new book.
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck! -- Herby talk thyme 18:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the welcome. I'm trying to "be bold" without being "too bold". I'm trying to keep an eye on existing styles and guidelines and using other pages within the book for examples on layout and coidng. Been to a bunch of the pages you have mentioned. Thanks again for the welcome.

Pete 18:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Feel free to get in touch if you need any help - -- Herby talk thyme 09:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Questions!
Hi Pete - good to hear from you. You gets loads of brownie points from me for user the "edit summary" apart from anything else - a rarity here!

So some answers (accurately my thoughts - answers will be yours!). Quite a lot of wikibooks seems to have been created enthusiatically and then abandoned (I've only been here a couple of weeks myself but I was and still am on Wikipedia too).

Take a look at the history of the page you are interested in. When was the last consistent contribution by a named editor (IP's kinda don't count)? Go to that editors user page and look at "user contributions" - that will give you an idea of whether they are still active but on other books maybe. If they are a message on their talk page should get you some answers. Frankly if they aren't active make it your way (any changes are always reversible effectively).

Until I got here I'd not done much page moving but it doesn't hurt . As to the effect on links you can always look at the "What links here" in the toolbox but in practice you can check out "Module cleanup" (under "Tools") and the look at "Redirects" there. Anything is fixable! I'll happily help if needed. Consider posting in the "Staff lounge" too. A very small but friendly bunch and that applies to the very few active admins too.

Feel free to get back to me if I can help at all and best of luck with the change in direction - I've done a bit of "late learning" too but not as ambitious as yours. You know where I am - all the best -- Herby talk thyme 16:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

PS - most of my "best" ideas came from looking at pages I like and copying the layout, wikitext, whatever! - H


 * Thanks Herby. I'm certainly familiar with the "start and abandon" thing. I've done it on a number of software projects myself. Fortunately, for a project like this, people can step in at any time and continue the work, which is nice. I'm very busy these days, but I'm taking organic chemistry right now and I'm finding that if I have to write about it, then I have to know it well enough to write about it and that's helping me learn more. I also tend to remember the stuff I write myself better than what I read, so part of it is just an exercise in studying for me.


 * As for the edit summaries, I set my preferences to remind me. As a software engineer, we use software for keeping track of code changes and it's REALLY, REALLY valuable, especially when you wonder, "Why did I do that?" So, unless I'm simply fixing some spelling or formatting, I'll generally leave comments as to why I made the change I made.


 * Thanks for the tips on how to maintain the links and tracking down active authors. Those will be really helpful (well, the first will. The second will only be helpful if there are any active authors...) Thanks again. Pete 16:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I understand the idea of it helping the study - had such a thing existed when I did mine it probably would have helped a lot. I'll help if I can (but the chemistry knowledge is VERY out of date!) -- Herby  talk thyme 16:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not too concerned with the "knowledge" aspect. I have a lot of resources. 4 organic chemistry textbooks, a fantastic professor, and the web. In making sure that what I write is accurate, it really reinforces all the information in my head. Once I'm done with organic chemistry, I may end up contributing to other books (biochemistry, anatomy, physiology, etc) as I take the classes, since it's clearly helping me to learn the stuff better.

Importing from Wikipedia
Hi Pete, sorry I misunderstodd the question on the staff lounge :). If you've been gone for a while and arte now returned, you might not know about the Special:Import function we have now. If you want to "harvest" wikipedia atricles for making chapters of the book, just request them on WB:RFI... this imports all revisions of the wikipedia article, so (a) you don't have to start every chapter from scratch, and (b) it's all good with the copyrights.

We can import templates as well as articles, of course :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 17:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Pete - told you they were nice folk (mostly )! -- Herby talk thyme 18:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW the "undelete" request could be addressed to Johnny too (or another admin or staff lounge) - not sure the page you put it on gets much attention! -- Herby talk thyme 18:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help guys. The undelete request went to the undelete request page. That's where the image cleanup said to put it. I can send it straigth to Johnny, though. I still have a lot of work to do on the organic chemistry book. There's a lot of cleanup, some reorganization to make things flow a little better, and so forth. Once that stuff is done, I'll probably want to import some templates from Wikipedia to add to the articles. In As an example, the reactions are all done as an appendix, which is really fine, but when talking about structure, generally, there are reactions that are specific to certain structures, so having links to those from the structure pages would be useful, and I think the template that I specified in the staff lounge is appropriate for that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pdavis68 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 12 Nov 2006  (UTC)


 * The structure here is a bit "loose" - if in doubt - staff lounge/user talk page will probably get the quickest response. In passing, a reminder to sign talk page stuff stuff tho I can't talk cos I just missed one on Johnny's!.  Also "Recent Changes" can help you see what is going on and where activity is. -- Herby  talk thyme 18:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Org chem
Hi Pete I've merely removed the link. The page is still there but I've asked for it to be deleted.

I tinker with Org Chem from time to time but mostly I'm doing the A-level Applied Science book. The two overlap a bit, mind. Anything you think I could tackle in Org Chem? Ewen 16:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Honestly Ewen, the Org. Chem book needs so much work, you could pick almost any page and find a good bit of stuff that needs to be added, fixed, or whatever. I don't want to drag you away from the A-level Applied Science, unless you feel a strong motivation to get into the organic chem. For myself, I see it like this: I'm currently learning organic chem and working on this book is simply my way of studying. As a writer, I try to make sure what I write is correct, and that means I need to really understand it well. Since I have a long way to go, I'm just looking at the book as a long-term studying aid and will devote as much time as I can in an effort to better understand it all. So I'm in no particular rush to have anything done to it, but I'm certainly not opposed to help. I guess, more importantly, it would be nice to have someone I could bounce ideas off of and get recommendations. -- Pete 16:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Navigation popups
Could check this out if you want - hover mouse over link and voila - preview! Just don't tell eveyone . There are other useful bits around too - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 18:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Herby, I'll check it out. Relly, what I'd find more useful (and I may try to code this myself), is to have the preview pop up in a separate browser window. I have two monitors and what I usually do, particularly when editing an existing document, is show the original in one browser on one screen, and edit it in another browser on the other screen. So being able to popup the preview in a separate window and place that in the other screen would be nice. I might be able to take that script and modify it to do that. -- Pete 18:47, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Not trying to bug you but
you are obviously a useful editor - could I ask you to look at this Staff_lounge and see if you feel like helping a bit. I do realise you have your own "thing" to do and won't be offended if it's no - cheers -- Herby talk thyme 19:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Herby, no bother at all. I chimed in on the topic. My issue, really, is simply time. I have a tendency to want to jump into things with grandiose plans and other priorities destroy my plans. So I'm taking my contributions here, one step at a time. I'm going to contribue to the book as it's convenient for me and as it serves my own selfish purposes. I'll help out in other areas when asked and if I have the time to spare, but work and school are absolute priorities to me right now. I'm considering very seriously going to med school and to keep that option open, because of grades when I was younger, I need to get pretty close to straight As, which means I devote extra time to school to make sure that happens. Anyway, just wanted to make my position clear. Happy to help where I can, but my time is limited.


 * I guess I was looking to confirm a suspicion that you could be interested in the project as a whole rather than a particular area. Time is always an issue - here is voluntary! -- Herby  talk thyme 10:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Herby, I am interested in the project as a whole, and to be honest, I think that time would best be spent trying to get the site better known. I've been using Wikipedia for a couple years now but I came across wikibooks by complete accident. I'm not completely out of touch with what's going on on the internet. I'm a regular Slashdot reader, and maybe it's been mentioned on Slashdot.
 * My honest opinion is that the site should make the books that are complete (or more so than say, organic chem) very visible and books that aren't so complete (like organic) less visible. I'm not really sure how you do that. But here's my thinking. When new people come to the site, you want them to see mostly finished products. You want them to look around and say, "Wow, they're really producing something here." And if they want to get involved and dig a little deeper, they'll find there are other books that need lots of work. But, as they say, you never get a second chance to make a first impression, and the first impression people get of the site shouldn't be, "Wow, they have a long way to go..."
 * I think this would drive more interest in the site as a whole and probably get a lot more people editing. For books that are complete, people ought to be getting out there on other web sites and recommending and linking to the books. There ought to be tons of incoming links to those books. I think it's going to be the only way to drive up the editorship significantly.
 * Anyway, just my opinion. -- Pete 13:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Got a feeling that it is A - a very good point & B - should be posted in the staff lounge. I got to here thro a random edit on a page I was watching on wikip. Looked at the editor, found this on his page and realised there was quite a bit to do and not many people, ho hum - I'll find the way out one day.  All the best -- Herby  talk thyme 14:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

E-Z notation of Alkenes
Ewan, I noticed you've been doing some work in the Stereochemistry section. Something that seems really out of place to me is that the E-Z notation for Alkenes is discussed in both Chirality/R-S_notational_system and Chirality/Diastereomers. Where it isn't discussed is in the Alkenes/Naming_alkenes section. I think both of those sections ought to be collapsed into one section and moved to Alkenes/Naming_alkenes. I also think the cis-trans naming stuff should be moved Alkanes/Naming_alkanes. Do you agree? If so, I'll be happy to do it if you want, but I just didn't want to step on anything you're currently working on.

Pete, I'd like to have a single section for stereochemistry with quick summaries where relevant on the alkanes, alkenes, etc pages. Cis/trans isomers are not limited to alkenes (1,2-dichlorocyclohexane, for example) so although the alkene section should have a brief account of cis/trans isomerism I think it would be best to have the main discussion of these isomers in a stand-alone section. Ewen 14:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've centralised the stereoisomerism section by cutting and pasting material from the large sections under 'Enantiomers' and 'Naming alkanes'. I'm not sure 'Enantiomers' should be retained - enantiomers are simply chiral molecules so the 'Chirality' section is the one I've used to stash all the relevant material with 'Enantiomers' reduced to a stub.


 * Under naming alkanes, naming alkenes and cycloalkanes I've referenced the stereochemistry area and edited the discussion to a few lines pertinent to alkanes, alkenes or cycloalkanes respectively.


 * Ewen 15:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you misunderstood my original note. I suggested moving E-Z to alkenes (to which it's specific) and cis-trans to alkanes since cis-trans applies to cycloalkanes and they're covered in the alkanes section. Alkanes always comes before alkenes in the learning, so there's no point in rehashing it there, but to me, these issues have more to do with naming and less to do with stereochemistry. They're simply naming conventions. Stereochemistry, on the other hand, is about structure and geometry. The only naming specific stuff that I think should really be there is the R/S, d/l, and (+)(-) stuff which is directly related to stereochemistry. Anyway, that's just my personal opinion, and I'm flexible, but that's the way all 4 of my organic chemistry books organize it and it simply makes sense to me. -- Pete 17:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that's the way to do it, but who am I to judge? On the one hand, following the standard textbook organisation makes sense. On the other hand, this is an online book with hyperlinks - a traditional linear structure is not necessary.


 * E-Z is not specific to alkenes; cycloalkanes can/should be named using E-Z notation. Putting cycloalkanes before alkenes (if we follow a linear sequence) creates a problem: A reader might expect cis/trans E/Z to be under alkenes, but we're putting it under cycloalkanes because they come first. Hmm. I've been trying to make brief notes on these topics in the cycloalkane and alkene sections with a reference to the main chapter on stereochemistry with the technical discussion of how to use CIP priority rules, etc. I'm sure that merging the various pieces into a single main section and little referring sections has been beneficial; but where to put the main section?


 * BTW: Let's post everything here. I'll put your Talk page on my watchlist and then I won't miss your replies. I should have thought of that sooner. Duh! I'm not the most experienced here myself... Of course, if it's one particular page we're discussing, each page has its discussion page...


 * Ewen 20:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * "Of course, if it's one particular page we're discussing, each page has its discussion page..."


 * This is true, however the discussion is in regards to which page it all belongs. You're right, we might be better served discussing it somewhere in the book, though I don't think there are any other people working on the book right now.


 * Although the IUPAC specifications don't use the word "alkene", they use the term double-bonded atoms. The E-Z is used because the cis-trans system is inadequate for tri- and tetra-substituted alkenes. I suppose you could end up with double-bonded sulphers or phosphates other atoms capable of 4+ bonding pairs that might appropriately use E-Z, though I cannot think of a single example where this isn't handled by functional group namings. Can you provide an example of a non-alkene using the E-Z system? I have no recollection of ever seeing it associated with a non-alkene and can't find anything in the IUPAC specs that lead me to believe that it can be. I could very well be wrong, though.


 * The truth is, as long as the stereochemistry stuff comes before the alkene section, I suppose it's fine. I'd be more concerned if it came after the alkene section. For now, I guess we can just leave it the way it is and worry about it if there's ever a major re-ordering of chapters. -- Pete 21:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I forgot to address your comment: "Putting cycloalkanes before alkenes (if we follow a linear sequence) creates a problem". I completely agree and that's something that ought to be fixed. Currently Cycloalkanes and alkanes are handled together and that needs to be fixed. -- Pete 21:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The firstsite that I used for the IUPAC rules isn't an actual IUPACsite,butgenerally has easier to follow interpretations of the rules.But I just checked the  [|IUPAC Gold Book] and it very specifically says alkenes and  "related systems" and lists a few examples, all double-bonded. -- Pete 21:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, you found that site too! It's worth listing as a link for the book. You're dead right: E/Z notation is not for cycloalkanes; R/S notation does the trick. Ewen 21:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point to link to the site in the book. IUPAC can get extremely overbearing, particularly with large molecules. Thank God for software that can name stuff from the models!!!! -- Pete 23:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Image deletions
Hi Pete... your best bet it to just mark them for speedy deletion... use delete to do that.

BTW: have you considered uploading to Commons rather than to here? This allows any wikimedia project to link to the image without having to reload it on that project (for example, if the book you're working on was translated into another language, they would have the images ready to go). -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Double redirects
Hi Pete - you've been around long enough to sort your own out  -. Quite a few are yours I think but do let me know if you want a hand (one of those things I look at from time to time) cheers -- Herby talk thyme 16:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Herby, thanks for pointing it out. Could be either me or Ewen. We've both been reorganizing that section a lot the past week... I'll get it cleaned up. -- Pete 16:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 *  - thanks -- Herby talk thyme 16:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Okie dokie, I think we're good... I'll try to keep an eye on those in the future. -- Pete 16:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No worries - it's just an easy one to keep an eye on. Just moved a bunch of pages myself so in a day or two they may show.  Case of checking back from time to time - regards -- Herby  talk thyme 17:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Votes_for_deletion VfD
(cross posted to Swift & Pete)

Could you just confirm that you are happy with Ewen's comments at the bottom of this debate. My sense of tidiness (among other things) makes me want to close and archive this but I would not wish to do so without your approval. Then I'll close it and archive it unless anyone else wants to with "doom" on Organic Chemistry/Acetone peroxide synthesis. I'm guessing if the staff chemistry experts are happy with it the rest of us will be fine -- Herby talk thyme 18:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Pete - hopefully I can finish this one off quite quickly -- Herby talk thyme 18:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Referencing
Pete

I found good referencing trick for citing the same reference serveral times. First time, use ref name=whatever (and /ref as usual). Subsequently, use ref name=whatever/. I edited the Organic Chemistry/Alkenes page to include this system. Ewen 15:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ewen. I was wondering about that. Seemed kind of redundant to have it twice down there, but didn't know how to fix it.
 * On another topic, do you know where (if anywhere) organic chemistry students hang out on the internet? I mean, are there forums and stuff where chemists ask each other questions? Not just kids trying to blow stuff up, I mean... I saw a posting on Usenet where a guy wanted to synthesis 2R-2-hydroxypropionamidine. This is quite a ways out of my league, but I gave it my best shot (13-step synthesis). But I would have liked to have a place to ask questions of other chemists. I pepper my professors with so many, I'd like to take some of the weight of my many, many questions, off of them. -- Pete 00:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted pages from Organic chemistry
Cross posted to User talk:Ewen --Swift 02:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I just deleted a bunch of pages marked by you and User:Ewen with delete. A few of these were linked to from Organic Chemistry/Book outline. I thought I'd give you the heads-up so you could update that to fit your new outline or delete it as well. Thanks for your hard work, --Swift 02:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Reorganisation?
Talk:Organic_Chemistry

A bit of constructive criticism to consider! Ewen 19:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)