Talk:Lithium triethylborohydride

So, I have a questions for the authors of this article. Why use the abbreviation/acronym LiTEBH? The in-line formula LiEt3H is no longer (by direct measurement with a ruler), and is understandale by any chemist. My view is that acronyms are a necessary evil in organic chemistry, but should only be used when a more readable chemical formula is not available, or takes significantly more space, or is itself hard to decipher. Especially an Encyclopedia, with its lofty goals of informing everyone, not just the hyper-specialists, should resist the acronym-mania of the synthetic organic chemists. ChemistHans 22:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I am completly agree with his comments. But it should be noted that whatever he told is only in case of chemist view but for the peoples those who are not related to science, the LiTEBH is good abbreviation.

Gorakh (Scientist) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.12.11.179 (talk) 07:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Problem with reducing esters/lactones
The referenced supplied for reducing lactones/esters does NOT discuss those reactions. Instead, it details reduction of alkyl halides! Armadillo1985 (talk) 22:38, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)