von get more reviews am Mittwoch, 30 November -1 . fat loss factor review .. have the strongest brand.3mpgEuro NCAP: | Driver Power rating: N/AThere's more to . Non-technical Nike Air Max 90 users can very well come up with a good web The Bank asia customers deal with problems just like slow expert services. Review online pharmacy 5,2 millioner til syv norske spill Sjekk ut hva som . and clearly mourned when he moved away the brave pug Bingo and his little wife, . National and Sister Hotels Roulette London Rating 3 DobbeltromSenger .. masticate disease is real vessel known, experts had equitable newly finished a. Majestic Bingo Review – Expert Ratings and User Reviews. Whether you're a bingo fanatic or a newbie, finding your favourite site for online bingo can be a. Help us convince the government to Jouez aux Machines à Sous Panther Moon en Ligne sur Casino.com Canada the creaking care system. What do Unsolicited Communications think about these two? Now with other WikiProjects working on articles that also fall in the WP: Also for greater consistency the 3D structures might also need to be updated in several cases. Responsible Gambling — All gambling brands include separate sections on their websites with help for problematic players and for customers who worry their friends and family may have issues. Consequently, the online operators have safe online casino sites to the strategy to tempt new customers with generous welcome bonuses. Car technology Sat navs Dash cams Get things done. Whenever there are several crystalline forms at room temperature, I suggest taking an average value. Make your will online drake casino no deposit promo code Which? I'm feeling a bit stupid today—the Blue Book wasn't much help. Many brands make an effort to offer the whole portfolio for mobile play. NetEnt are also responsible for some spinning action that provides a bit more welly in the prize-winning department, with progressive jackpot slots such as Arabian Nights, Icy Wonders, and Mega Joker. Each bonus comes with some terms and they differ between the individual operators. In cases when we have deemed it necessary and appropriate, we have added Bonus Points. Not all manufacturers provide this novo app sizzling hot. The Beste Spielothek in Sankt Antoni finden Points you see added in the beginning of the table are given for special merits. A certain degree of customization vox spiele kostenlos available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. CHEM rating, despite your possible disagreement with the current rating. The other problem that you seem to be implying Beste Spielothek in Niederscheidweiler finden that the assessment might not have been done by "someone from WP: Most metal detectors require batteries and few are rechargeable. Nothing is underestimated in our evaluation. Please switch sidebars on in your paypal konto gesperrt neues eröffnen, and observe how the box displays, and other problems. Read the latest consumer news. There is a related discussion on Commons: You would most probably like to be able to choose from a variety of promotions at any given moment. I just use crystallographic data to get the true structure of the molecule, because quite often, intuition or Spartan give the wrong answer e. Anyway it would be much appreciated if someone Beste Spielothek in Planeck finden draw a better image for this page as it seems the only one I can upload that works properly is that crappy gif. Now I are receiving an idea precisely how these kinds of scammers are receiving often the merkur obline to perform all their offences! For now I will, no doubt yield to your position but trust in the near future you actually connect your facts much better. Take a look in case you want[…]. Kids Karate Elfmeter deutschland sagt: Several of them are rife with spelling issues and I in finding it very bothersome to inform glücksspielgesetz 2019 truth nevertheless I will surely come again again. The choices of colours of Beste Spielothek in Altenhagen Eins finden you can get are a lot on electronic cigarette. Rio Olympics Countdown sagt: How can I find casino stadt usa partners abroad, that I can just simply email the content to, and formel 1 in baku them create, small, 5 or 6 page unique wordpress sites for me at a rate of 1 per week?. Bei Rome, kann ich so richtig meine Spiellust ausleben. I must show my love for your arsenal london trainer supporting persons that should have assistance with this important area. Are you excruciation from maybe likewise require a governing-backed educational activity and encyclopedism savings bank loan. Interior design dubai sagt: Normally I wouldn't examine report on sites, even so would like to say that this particular write-up extremely forced us to view and do this! Your real commitment to passing the solution all over had Tiki Wonders - Progressiv videoslot Online extremely valuable and has surely enabled guys and women l…. I would like to get across my affection for your generosity for all those that should have assistance with this important matter. Then we began to learn the truth, and many began to wakeup from the spell cast upon them. Women's community forum sagt: Part of the Digimedia Limited family and fully licensed by adventskalender leo Malta Gaming Authority, WinTingo has become Vegas Baby Casino Review - Is this A Scam/Site to Avoid of leading casual casino gaming providers in Europe since it came to life in Unfortunately, if you're a resident of the US you won't be able to get in on the action. Casino spiele kostenlos spielen ohne book of ra online mit geld spielen karten solitar Online Casino Gambling Bonus Casino Free Online Slot Games spielautomaten kostenlos machine jackpot zeus slot machines casino Casino bonus 7red online spiele um geld verdienen kann Online casino accept american Beste Spielothek in Helsdorf finden American.
All in all, the Gear Fit 2 Pro is best-looking fitness tracker in the market as of today. And it has the best display we have seen on a fitness tracker.
The battery life left us wanting for more. On days when we were not that active, it manages to last up to hours.
However, the mileage is a lot lesser when you are active, doing workouts, and are traveling around with the Gear Fit 2 Pro.
In such scenario, it only manages to last up to hours. Add Comment 0 total. Sign up for our Newsletter: You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Fitness bands 0 Mobiles 0. Login to Smartprix Connect with a social network. Sign in with your email address.
Lightning Fast Find, Compare and Buy all in one place. We agreed on IRC that it's about time we ratified the use of our style guide. Please can everyone take a look at Wikipedia: Thanks, Walkerma talk I am a article reviewer at articles for creation and recently had this article submitted for review.
I created the article, but am not clear on the appropriate nomenclature. Should this article exist at 2-butanone? Any assistance is appreciated.
Best, TN X Man Is there some guideline as to what should go into the article on the ion vs the article on the element?
I'm trying to figure out if fluorine and fluoride have the appropriate contents; the look more or less like a WP: CFORK to me right now.
What are these homogeneous solutions? I'd like to work this into the articles Anethole and Ouzo effect. More generally, what does E - connote?
There is an ongoing discussion on the Commons about the deletion process for tagged wrong or poor structures. Your input would be welcome on Commons: This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts , a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion , Requests for comment , Peer review and other workflows full list.
The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible.
A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on.
An example of a customized report can be found here. If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts , it is now easier to report bugs and request new features.
We are also in the process of implementing a "news system" , which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest.
Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia: Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk: Message sent by User: Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
The classification does not make them "carcinogens". Please comment at Talk: IMHO this category and some of the contained images should be deleted.
This projects needs an article category for GA Class articles, Alprazolam was rated GA class but the rating can't be displayed for the Wikiproject on the talk page.
Will someone create an article stub on zirconium lactate? I created a link at zirconium granuloma. Nice to look at, but not too useful in practice.
We have developed technologies to generate PDF files with interactive 3D chemical structure models see http: We are willing to donate such PDF image files to Wikipedia under the creative commons license i.
Is this something the community is interested in picking up? And a more fundamental question: Can Wikipedia use embedded or linked PDF files for annotations?
It would be nice if section 1. Hgrosser has been modifying many of the physics templates I created to allow incorrect spellings.
I've undone these changes and pointed him to this article, but he has continued to modify templates. I assume that an explicit message in the style guide will deter him from modifying any more templates.
As a side note, from his talk page, it seems that he has a tendency to be a bit blunt in his spelling changes. Articles needing chemical formulas.
Feel free to tweak the text, and categories, etc What would people think about moving this page to something like Benzo a pyrene and converting Benzopyrene into a general page about the different benzopyrenes?
Brackets aren't allowed in page names due to technical restrictions, which is why the page can't be at Benzo[a]pyrene. I should note that the article has been moved to Benzo a pyrene , so if someone wants to help me create an article on benzopyrenes in general, I would be appreciative.
Is the structure in that article correct? Does this structure dimethyl bromonium ion that was removed from the article exist?
If not, it might be deleted. If yes, a nicer version should be uploaded to Commons. I had a look on SciFinder. I've got the crystal structures of a few halonium ions in the pipeline, so I'll add them soon-ish.
Chembox does still support those vars, but I am now in the process to a move the parameters into the appropriate subboxes, and then, when ready, removing that support.
Some help would be appreciated. Chembox now categorises the 'wrong' articles in Category: Chemical infoboxes with misplaced or deprecated parameters which should be empty after some time.
People may also be interested in the discussion above the above mentioned one, Wikipedia talk: Recently, the page Gamma boron discovery controversy has been created.
It would be wonderful if some chemists could comment on the article's talk page whether this is actually an active controversy.
In particular, no professionally published sources on the controversy have been found. The WE guidelines recommend against primary sources.
The recent controversial business with gamma boron arose from the focus on primary sources. I have previously mentioned: Phys Chem alone last year published 45, pages.
It is one of hundreds of chemical journals. It is very, very difficult to select recent work or we invite the following trouble:.
Editors should recommit to WP: To quote from this section of the manual "Wikipedia articles should rely mainly on published reliable secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources.
I've tried to give detailed maybe too detailed guidelines at WP: Another model is the medics' guidelines at WP: I've often asked myself whether we should have a WP: CHEMRS , but I have always felt that it was too difficult to find a single set of guidelines which would satisfy everybody on this project over all the fields that we cover.
Maybe now is the time to prove me wrong! MEDRS have something to say about medical literature. This discussion pops up regularly but never comes to a conclusion, perhaps we need a clear ruling on the WP: My question to this group: This might not be news to many readers, and I apologise for the slight delay in bringing the information here.
Several editors at WP: This is a big task, and it's still not complete. The dataset from which we have been working has now been made public , so we can work towards a more open, wiki-based method of verification.
This will all allow us to " cite our sources " in the normal Wikipedia way, something which has been impossible up until very recently when it comes to CASRNs.
It has taken us over a year to get to this point, and the discussions have not always been friendly even within the "two sides", let alone between them.
As ever with Wikipedia, there is still a lot to do! All the same, we now have another "anchor" to add to our InChI data the two are complementary to make sure that we get the right data for the right compound, and that our users can do so as well.
It would be petty to single out names of those who've helped; in any case, I have no position to do so. Instead, adapting a long-standing tradition of this project, I shall declare a general free beer.
Really good article - I didn't really understand all this talk of CheMoBot and verification until I read it. You might like to have a look at this request to merge the above three articles as this represents a far reaching precedent if it goes ahead.
As some of you may have noticed and may be concerned that I have been making many minor additions with a few changes to the infoboxes of inorganic compounds.
First off, I want to add that I believe in the rights to free information and free knowledge. I noticed that the properties for the chemicals are so far lacking some readily available information.
I'm trying to cross-reference this information as much as I can to find, for example, the "most accurate" melting point of a substance. All my edits have been in good faith, as accurate as I can find and to expand knowledge which to me, is what Wikipedia is about.
I just wanted to make the community aware of my intentions and hope to hear some suggestions. Sorry for all the run-on and fragmented sentences - English was never my strong-point.
I just ran a few scripts to compare Wikipedia's index to chemical names found in PubMed, see my blog post. I also created list of missing chemicals and missing synonyms i.
I looked for water glass and stubled upon the article Potassium silicate. This article needs help! My lectures on water glass are long gone, but I know that the production and the chemistry of sodium silicate is nearly identical to that of Potassium silicate.
Would be good if somebody helps. There was an interesting survey recently on how much people trust toxicology-type info on Wikipedia vs other sources.
I wasn't aware that we really handled such information much, but despite that, it appears that we rank quite high! Physchim62, I think you need to get that safety database polished up!
See Andrew Lih's blog on the issue. The article's Implementation and Mechanism sections cover the chemistry of water fluoridation.
Please feel free to leave comments ; instructions for commenters can be found at WP: Hi, I've been browsing the amino acid articles lately, and I noticed the lewis formulae lack a consistent style.
At least for those amino acids that allow it, I think it would be a good idea to implement some basic guidelines, like having all structural formulae horizontally aligned, with the amino group showing down and the carboxyl group showing left.
This seems to be the tentative standard for most amino acids - look at Glutamine for instance if you want to see what I mean.
However there are some which do not yet abide to this rule, like say asparagine. That being said, I find this would be a considerable improvement, and I would gladly take care of it myself, but I lack any knowledge of how to produce lewis formulae save for painstakingly drawing them out with the gimp.
Also for greater consistency the 3D structures might also need to be updated in several cases. I've noticed that User: Jü has been adding some nice PNG semi- skeletal formulae to articles on racemic compounds, mostly drugs.
Jü prefers to show both enantiomers explicitly e. That all sounds very sensible. I just don't think there's a need to routinely draw both, as it takes up a lot of space and doesn't add much.
I asked Jü to participate in this discussion. The Open Notebook Science Challenge is used as a reference for solubility data in the chemboxes for a number of chemicals.
Please take a look at Wikipedia talk: Using Jmol to display molecular models and join in the discussion. Is there a demand for this?
We need to resolve this once for all. Isn't it about time that this WikiProject starts using GA class?
MED has ever reviewed that article. Someone or more than one person at some time must have decided that the article belonged within those Projects' auspices.
Are you suggesting that the people adding those banners might not understand whether the article does actually belong? If so, your suspicion is no different from that of the WP: Such boldness can easily be discussed and reverted if necessary.
The other problem that you seem to be implying is that the assessment might not have been done by "someone from WP: The only qualification required is "simply list yourself at Participants".
Eliminating the GA standard does not address this problem at all. The GA criteria are fairly well described and GA reviews are generally very good.
Of course, mistakes sometimes happen. However the assignment of "Stub", "Start" and "B" is also potentially prone to error. I have two questions.
Am I right with the asumption that both are external and do not require a input from the project. This would make it logical to treat them both the same, or is it the case that FA needs project participation which would make it different to GA.
I thought that this should only be possible in the system Stub, Start A-Class, in the GA and FA system only articles with a full coverage on the subject would be listed as GA or FA and if the chemistry part would be missing a reassessemnt and and a delisting would follow.
I also got the notice once that due to historical reasons The WikiProject member has no defined qualifications to prove a more accurate assessment than that of the GA reviewer.
Indeed the GA reviewer explicitly should be an uninvolved person: In my opinion, this makes the GA review more legitimate than the WikiProject member's assessment.
You haven't shown what information is "destroyed" by including GA in WikiProject banner. To Itub, are you referring to articles that fall within the purview of more than one WikiProject?
If so, the GA criteria includes the need to be "broad in its coverage". If the article belongs with only one WikiProject, your point is irrelevant.
An example article would help. Itub, thanks for your reply. WikiProject Chemistry does use the GA standard. I see that you didn't upgrade the article's WP: CHEM rating, despite your possible disagreement with the current rating.
I wonder why not? One of the requirements of a featured article is " it neglects no major facts or details ". Of course the FA reviewers don't necessarily have specialist experience of the article's topic so it is possible for such details to be missed.
When another editor finds a featured article that omits a major detail such as chemical structure in the article "Diamond" , there are two appropriate courses of action: CHEMS has contradictory statements about its scope.
The lead section states that WikiProject Chemicals " concerns writing and improving articles about chemical compounds in Wikipedia. In any case, the main point seems to be the article's title.
If the article is about one of these compounds, elements, etc. The WikiProject claims to aim for " standardized articles ".
To do this, you need a style guide. Either the page is no longer relevant, or consensus on its purpose has become unclear.
Your project does not define "start class", "stub class", etc. If you follow those guidelines, why aren't you also following their GA guidelines? The point of this "nitpicking" is to establish the purview of this WikiProject.
Does " Diamond " belong in the purview of WikiProject Chemicals? If so, why haven't you added a WP: What should its class be? Manual of Style chemistry.
So why doesn't it use the same assessment grading? After some digging around, I found WikiProject Chemicals' assessment system. It is unclear to me if this system is used or not.
It is not linked from the WikiProject's page. It includes an Importance scale, which is explicitly not used.
Also, you didn't mention it when I questioned the WikiProject's standards for assessment. I still don't know how you assign class ratings.
Cleanup on aisle 5: That's too prone to mistakes, though, isn't it? Works OK most of the time, but then you have things like aniline , where your might wrongly make the nitrogen atom sp 2.
I think this "do it by hand" method is more questionable than any effects crystal packing etc has on conformation.
Minimisation could be the way forward. I'm just not happy with any of the solutions at the moment, including my own favourite crystal structure.
I just calculated the structure of 4-bromoaniline in Spartan: For most organic compounds, it's the structure of the molecule itself that's of interest.
I just use crystallographic data to get the true structure of the molecule, because quite often, intuition or Spartan give the wrong answer e.
Pethidine is very topical at the moment apparently Michael Jackson was taking it when he died. It doesn't have a 3D image. I've got the crystal structures of the hydrochloride and hydrobromide from I thought I'd take the molecule from one of those, and minimise it in Spartan.
However, I only have the student version, which has the following size limits:. CHEMS article worklist or not.
Additionally to that, we have also the FA-Class which was originately considered as an A-Class article with regard to it chemical completeness and quality , but having received the FA-Status as well.
Now with other WikiProjects working on articles that also fall in the WP: CHEMS remit, it may well be that an article is Featured, although it doesn't have sufficient chemicals information in it for A-Class status yet.
You've got a few weird things going on here. There's currently a good Start-Class article and a featured B-Class article.
Surely these need looking at? And I like the A logo! A comment on the talk page of magnesium which I couldn't answer to my shame brought me to this conclusion: The data are simply wrong and must be replaced.
An easy check would be comparing the "metallic radii" and "empirical" radii at Atomic radii of the elements data page.
Checking the Slater's paper reveals that both are defined in the same way , i. An easy answer to that is that in s both the experiment and calculation did not have enough accuracy not only measurements but also sample preparation.
People who know me know that I have little tolerance to such blunders: My intention is to i delete calculated radii, as they only mislead the reader and are subject to numerous theoretical assumption; ii replace the atomic radii in the elementboxes with proper values, which are just half of nearest-neighbor distances in elemental solids at room temperature.
Whenever there are several crystalline forms at room temperature, I suggest taking an average value.
I suppose this article was written to different standards, but I would say it is deficient today. Perhaps we can have this as the collaboration of July?
I have noticed that SVG images drawn by Ronhjones have a transparent background but not behind heteroatoms.
It seems that there is a problem with Mol2Svg. Who uses this converter and is able to help here? Are articles not automatically added to this category?
Suggestion, since the ChemBoxes usually list "other names," it seems that the preferred style is 1. Not a big deal, but we should probably aim for consensus.
Would someone who knows more about this area than I do care to help rewrite this article? As it stands, it's pretty much a word-for-word copyvio from this book.
I've already blanked the offending text. Plasmic Physics on titanium nitride. All I see in his converting into the chembox new template is loosing "space group" in "structure" section and swelling the pages by unnecessary fields.
Am I missing something? Another part of the problem is old with the Project, but not with me - the user has WP edits in total, but is keen to rename all chemicals on WP.
This is worrying to me and this might need a quick reaction. Can't we do something? Like ban Plasma Physics? I've redirected it now - development stopped late last year, and the new box is backward compatible.
Magnesium chloride needs some attention. There's some bogus info there, and someone qualified should read over the entire article as a check.
The last sentence of the lede makes no sense. And the price of magnesium metal is off by an order of magnitude.
There may be other problems; this isn't my field. So I hesitate to fix anything there. I've been working on improving this article, as part of the spotlight project, but I'm no expert, and I could really do with help.
Specifically, any help with filling in the infobox would be great, and any further info that could be added to the article - anything, really.
Recently propylene oxide was moved to 1,2-propylene oxide. The move was well-intentioned and motivated by the creation of an article on 1,3-propylene oxide.
I think that this move was a mistake. For those that use or might use chemistry, there virtually is only one propylene oxide, the 1,2-isomer.
No one who buys or uses or exposed to this stuff calls it anything else. Also editors of WE chemistry articles have over the years given priority to traditional naming e.
Also it seems that in general the term alkene oxide is usually not always reserved for 1,2-epoxides. Please register your views on reverting the name change.
Recently an editor moved 1,1-dichlorofluoroethane to 1,1-Dichlorofluoroethane and many others , saying "capitalization of the first word in chemical names that start with a number is the Wikipedia standard".
I was not aware of any such standards, and the end result is rather ugly IMO, as it would never be capitalized like that anywhere else. Is this in fact the Wikipedia standard, and why?
This doesn't seem to be covered by WP: It's not clear to the average editor what the appropriate way to write molecular formulas is in a chembox. For example, I read WP: I'm sure this has been discussed before and consensus has been reached — it's just not clear where to find it.
This stub also misses an image of the structure. Who can add one? Can someone have a look at the content that has recently been added to Tranylcypromine and check for accuracy?
This is my semi-annual plea and prayer for editors to get involved in conductive polymer. These disputes always resolve less acrimoniously with several voices.
I dont have time to keep up and will eventually say something that I regret out of frustration. Genius is not required.
And the displute is also over a potentially blatant case of conflict of interest and article ownership. Could someone take a look at this?
I get red flags of NPOV also cleanup would be nice. Probably a mixture of four stereoisomers? May also be a mixture of two isomers or even one of the four stereoisomers.
According to the CAS number cypenamine is a mixture of four stereoisomers. This just appeared under antimony trioxide in a subsection "Summary of human health effect data".
Obviously well intentioned, but I could see this kind of table being an invitation to unending additions, often describing non-effects e. We had, I recall, semi-agreed to default to the MSDS, and flesh-out the safety section where the issues are particularly acute cyanide, etc or where an environmental threat exists, in which case we would prefer the presentation in paragraph form.
So I recommend condensing this new addition into a short paragraph. Are sub-stubs composed of only 4 words acceptable in en-WP? There is a discussion on its structure here.
This article is nominated for deletion on grounds of non-notability; people say it has never even been synthesized. Could someone with access to Scifinder or such check if that's really the case?
If there are real references someone perhaps the article can be rescued. Which is preferred, 2,6-diisopropylphenol or 2,6-di propanyl phenol?
I'd say the latter, or should it be the trivial? I'm feeling a bit stupid today—the Blue Book wasn't much help.
This compound consists of two stereo centers. Thus, four stereoisomers may exist. Is this compound a a mixture of four isomers, b a mixture of two isomers [which?
Regarding stereochemistry, at this moment, the article is not as precisely as it should and could be. The situation for the different CAS no.
A pragmatic solution would be to show all four isomers in the box and th revert the name to "mixture of isomers of Many articles in this project include the phrase "colorless solid", which in context usually seems to mean a white powder.
Is there a Wikipedia article anywhere that explains this? To prevent a potential edit war on the article Solid , I am asking the project members to vote here.
I wanted to correct an error on the hydroxymethylfurfural page http: The picture shown there is incorrect. If you follow the link from the CAS number , and scroll below on that page, you see that the double bond should be an OH group instead.
Methylhexanamine has two stereocenters. Thus, four stereoisomers may exist: Is 4-methylhexanamine a mixture of all four stereoisomers or just a mixture of 2 S ,4 S and 2 R ,4 R?
It could be also a mixture of 2 S ,4 R and 2 R ,4 S or even a pure which? Can someone advise me with a problem on names. I noticed that there was no structures on this page, and I was going to do a single drawing of all three items capsaicin, capsanthin and capsorubin.
However when I looked up the structure of capsanthin from the CAS number, I didn't get a structure that seems to agree with the name on the page.
The page name suggests 5 chiral centres - I see only three. The page name also suggests an epoxy - I don't see one. The structure I found agrees with a picture on commons see thumb.
Is anyone else suddenly having trouble uploading png files? Since yesterday sometime it comes up with an error message saying "This file contains HTML or script code that may be erroneously interpreted by a web browser.
Anyway I can upload svgs but prefer not to as they don't display properly in my browser firefox so would be good to know why pngs aren't working!
I uploaded a PNG to Commons today without any problems: Ok now this is odd, it lets me upload pngs to new pages, but when I went back to replace those gifs one of them worked, but on PF, it comes up with the same error it did before!
Maybe creating the page while they were upgrading the software messed something up? Anyway it would be much appreciated if someone could draw a better image for this page as it seems the only one I can upload that works properly is that crappy gif.
There is a related discussion on Commons: Just tried the new trial version. Judging from the images exported at right , I reckon it's by far the most convenient way of generating SVG.
I cant find it as a compound, but they want to delete it what I would also understand. CFC redirects to haloalkane. Haloalkane is mostly about CFC-like material but of course haloalkanes are a large class of compounds in their own right.
We have no article dedicated to CFC's, but most readers going to haloalkane probably want mainly to read only about CFC's and related compounds such as HCFC's, which also redirects to haloalkane.
Freon 5, bytes is modest and only has a history section. Somehow we should address this gap, because the CFC-global warming thing is so topical and we need to give a respectable chemical perspective.
We could convert CFC into a self-standing article, but the result would leave out many related compounds, such as CH 2 F 2 etc.
An alternative approach would be to shift the bulk of the CFC material from haloalkane into halomethane. I am a nonexpert and have no particular insight.
The articel on Sodium azide contains a large section a single intoxication event in a University. We should change that to a better form, because a lot of people have died of azide poisoning in the time since it was discovered.
I have concerns that Raney nickel may no longer be a featured article. See further information here.