Talk:Wieland–Miescher ketone
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
New contribution[edit]
It is interesting to follow the history of this name reaction. In 1985 Professor Agami and associates were the first to name the proline catalyzed Robinson annulation the Hajos-Parrish reaction (Agami, C.; Levisalles, J.; Puchot, C. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1985, 8, 441-442).
In 1986 Professor Henri B.Kagan and Professor Agami (J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986, 108, 2353-2357) still called it the Hajos-Parrish reaction in the Abstract of this paper.
In 2001 Professor Kagan published a paper entitled “Nonlinear Effects in Asymmetric Catalysis: A Personal Account” in Synlett 2001, No. SI, 888–899. In this paper he introduced the new title the Hajos-Parrish-Wiechert reaction.
In 2002 Professor Benjamin List added two more names and introduced the term Hajos-Parrish-Eder-Sauer-Wiechert reaction (B. List, Tetrahedron 58 (2002) 5573-5590).
The first announcement of the reaction appeared in 1971 in the patent literature as follows: Z. G. Hajos, D. R. Parrish, German Patent DE 2102623. (29 July 1971).In this Patent the isolation and characterization of the optically active intermediate alcohol 6 (bicyclic ketol) has been described.
- Thank you for the addition, but I moved the addition here. The data is certainly of interest for this article, but could you rewrite it in such a way that it is not disrupting the page layout. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Zoltan, I'll post here, but please create an account, makes communication easier) --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have stored this bit of information here: Hajos-Parrish-Eder-Sauer-Wiechert_reaction#Origin_name. I am assuming good faith here and that gentleman was Hajos himself, not smart to scare these sort of people away. Please reconsider deleting content just like that only because you would write it down differently, there are other options. V8rik (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Usually understand what V8rik has to say.This remark,however,under the * asterisk dated 15 January 2008 is a complete mistery. Please expand. Signed as you kindly suggested on another talk page.Zghajos (talk) 21:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- The explanation is simple: co-editor User:Beetstra (let me stress a very respected co-editor) deleted a contribution I think made by you (January 8 2007 see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wieland-Miescher_ketone&diff=99334045&oldid=99333704) which I disagreed with. I believe that we should try to encourage people to contribute to wikipedia. New contributors will no doubt make beginner mistakes (in wiki syntax or styleguide) but I prefer correcting some of the mistakes rather than simple delete the contribution. We also like to encourage experts in the field to contribute. V8rik (talk) 18:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
To V8rik: if I understand you correctly it was not I who wanted to scare people away? If so,please stress this in a response, because this talk-page made headline news on the Yahoo server.Thanks Zghajos (talk) 22:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Noooo!, I only suggested to Beetstra (not you) he should not scare away people for the reasons I have given. In no way I have implied you. I would like to stress again that contributions both by Beetstra and Zghajos are well respected and welcome V8rik (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Should we mention that this Wieland is not Heinrich Otto Wieland, but Peter Wieland form CIBA?--Stone (talk) 06:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
In 2009 profesor Bonjoch group develop a solvent free method for de enantioselective synthesis of the wieland–miescher ketone and analogues, in order to avoid multiple crystallizations steps. Is an nice article in Advanced Synthesis and Catalysis 2009 volume 351 pages 2482 – 2490.I thought it should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedroivan 86 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)