User:CantElopeIsland/Gallylene/Acc20 Peer Review

General info
CantElopeIsland
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:CantElopeIsland/Gallylene
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

·       Considering adding a citation when you introduce the concept of oligomeric gallanes.

·       Instead of “150 deg C” use the degrees symbol (“150 °C”)

o   Similarly, be careful to avoid using B for β

·       When you use E, you should parenthetically specify to what element(s) it refers in that context.

o   Also consider this for X later on in the page (TM(CO)3(GaX)), although this is less important because it’s pretty clear what you mean by this.

·       “Roesky and coworkers point at that” à change “at” to “out”

·       “incapable” not “uncapable”

·       Can you think of an adjective other than “interesting” to use when introducing Robinson’s Ga-Fe complex? Or just drop the adjective maybe.

·       The sentence “Indeed this topic has been studied computationally since, and mostly supported” isn’t entirely clear because you’re saying that the topic has been supported by computational work but not which viewpoint (Robinson’s or Cotton’s).

·       Be consistent in terms of nomenclature/orthography; change instances of “NacNacGa(1)” to “NacNacGa(I)”

o   Make sure to use a subscript for the 2 in CO2

o   Also I don’t think you need to type out “beta”; same with “sigma” and “pi” although spelling these out seems less weird to me

o   Instead of “a-diimine,” I’m pretty sure you mean “α-diimine”

o   Be consistent in either hyphenating “redox-active” or not (I think it is traditionally hyphenated)

o   Be consistent in hyphenation on σ/π- donation/accepting.

·       In the sentence beginning, “When R=p-tolyl the reaction afforded,” add a comma before “the” and maybe spaces around the = because I thought you were describing a double bond between the R group and p-tolyl.

·       You have a typo in the last sentence in the C-H activation section: bridginfg

·       In the first sentence under the Cycloadducts header, it looks like you accidentally left the word “reactivity” in but changed where the sentence was going, so I’d cut it or work in these gallylenes’ reactivity later in the sentence. Then again, you immediately describe the reactivity, so you probably don’t need to mention it in that first sentence.

·       I’d add a citation to the sentence, “The dpp-bian gallylene has been used by the Fedushkin group to prepare other cycloadducts, and dimeric species where the substrates are coordinated by two of the gallylene species.”

·       Check on typos in the sentence “Alternatively, the delocalized pi bond can directly form bond with substrates and lead to the cylcoadducts mentioned above.” : spelling of cycloadducts, and also I think you either mean “a bond” or “bonds”

·       For the figure caption: “Fedushkins reactivity of gallylenes and azides,” I would rephrase to “Reactivity of Fedushkin’s gallylenes and azides,” and also don’t forget the possessive apostrophe.

·       Typos in: “Products were confirmed via NMR and crytal XRD. The proposed mechanism for this reactivty inbolbes a [1+2] cycloaddition between the gallylene and carbodiimide, and there is computational evidence for this mechanism.” Also I’d rephrase the part of the second sentence after the comma to “for whose mechanism there is computational evidence,” and provide a citation, or I’d say “for whose mechanism Fedushkin et al. report computational evidence” if it’s from the same paper.

·       Typo in: “gallium’s relatively diminished Lewis acidicty.”

·       Typo in: “the M-Ga bond resemble single bonds with very small pi-oribtal contribution.”

·       In the sentence beginning, “Their calculations confer the idea that gallylene ligands,” I think “confer” isn’t quite the right verb you want here… maybe “confirm” or “support”?

·       Slight typo in: “Based on their calculated energies of transition state in the formation of TM(CO)3(GaX) from TM(CO)4 and GaX) in THF”

·       In the sentence, “Mondal and coworkers have computationally studied the aromaticity of NHC analogues, and found that gallylene NHC’s are the second most aromatic among the group 13 elements,” I think you should explicitly state which are the first (borylenes?).

·       Add hyperlinks to other related Wikipedia pages throughout! There are a lot of related topics that you mention for which there are Wikipedia pages that a reader might find helpful.

·       Overall, this was really good, your figures were very clear, and this was a thorough and well-contextualized overview that maintained neutrality per Wikipedia’s guidelines. Your article met all of the criteria on the Peer Review Checklist. Great job!