User talk:Chakyoun/sandbox

Response to Reviewers
The structure of the article was re-organized. The focus now is on the mechanism/synthesis of ROP, with links to their related or main articles. We revised the Thermodynamics section and decided to put it last, as suggested. Also, we grouped all the mechanisms under one section, "Mechanisms of ROP", as suggested by the librarian. Now the information are in their respective categories (sections).

Overall, the article is better organized. The references were also fixed, using doi and let wiki auto-cite (therefore, the link will lead to the actual article; we did not cite the abstract because this should be included in the website of the article). Likewise, relevant concepts are now linked to their respective wikipedia pages.

We also revised the figures and fixed any errors associated with them (wrong/missing arrows, small radical, etc). The format of the figures was changed to .png, as suggested, to preserve the quality of the figures when uploaded to the website. We decided to keep the size and position of some figures because they flow with the text. For example, all the mechanism figures were kept large and centered because it is easier to read the figures this way and avoid wrapping around the text (as in the case of figures positioned to the right or left).

The introduction was revised and key concepts were linked to their appropriate wikipedia sites to aid the understanding of the terms. Some sentences were re-worded so that a lay-person can understand. In this sense, the changes were not huge because ROP is a type of polymerization and anyone who visits this page would have a basic idea of what polymerization is. Two more sentences were added for the purpose of clarification too. A generic figure and IUPAC definition were added to complement the intro. The intro was also restructured so that the information is better organized.

In “History” section, the chronological ambiguity throughout the section is now resolved. All the previous works were cited accordingly. The word “synthesis” is now uncapitalized. Leuchs et al is now cited. The work of establishing mechanisms and thermodynamic in 1950’s was specified and cited. Information regarding vinyl polymerization and polycondensation is now removed since it disjoints the brief overview of the history. “Following control” is now translated into “controlled radical polymerization". "Vinyl polymerization" is not properly linked.

In the "Mechanisms of ROP" section, the information was revised and checked for any errors and also made consistent with regard to organization and punctuation. Under radical ROP, we reworded some of the sentences and reorganized information so that the concepts are clearer and the flow of information more logical. Additionally, we redrew the figures for this section.

AROP was also expanded and figures were added to complement the text and was made consistent with the other mechanism subsections. Information regarding the transfer/termination of AROP was clarified. Likewise, the ROMP subsection now contains a mechanism and a figure (previously, the subsection was simply about the catalysts used for ROMP).

In “Thermodynamics” section, the paragraphs were re-organized to exhibit the smoother flow of the content. All the symbols are denoted accordingly as well as their units. The sentence with the parentheticals is re-organized and moved to the introduction part. Kinetics were removed to focus on the thermodynamics.

In "Copolymerization" section, the content is now supported with the corresponding citations. The mechanism figure is now added to delineate the synthetic method.

Other general overall edits:
 * Removed all red internal links in article
 * Adjusted the size and location of images to make the flow of the page better
 * Reformatted most images to .png for better resolution; three images left in .tif because they look sharp online
 * Also combined the mechanism sections under one Level 2 section

Mr.Holmium (talk) 12:58, 14 March 2014 (UTC) Gracelyu (talk) 14:56, 14 March 2014 (UTC) Chakyoun (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review
Einsteinatemyhw (talk) 6:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Content

The wording of the introduction is awkward. You say that the chain is grown through ionic polymerization, yet you did not explain what that is or link to an appropriate wiki. The mechanism you describe is also not very helpful because you say that some cyclic compounds can undergo ROP through cleavage, but that does not tell me what kinds of cyclic compounds can do this and I do not know sure what kind of cleavage you are talking about. The last sentence is very awkward.

The first sentence of your history says that this has been used since the beginning of the century; you should specify which century, especially since we just entered a new century. Your second sentence says it has the oldest history, oldest history of what? You also capitalized synthesis which does not need to be capitalized. Leuchs needs to be cited. What established ROP in the 50’s? The inclusion of vinyl polymerization and polycondensation is disjointed, you introduced it into the middle of the paragraph when you were discussing ROP history. You could bring it to the beginning to discuss other types of polymerization to led into ROP history, but having in the middle of the paragraph is awkward. You said cyclic phosphorus polymerization was the youngest one, youngest one of what? The first high molecular weight phosphorus ROP in 76 needs a citation. I am not sure what “following control” means.

The first sentence of Thermodynamics and Kinetics can go further up in the article, maybe in the history or introduction. The second sentence is more fitting for the introduction of the thermodynamics and kinetics. In the thermodynamics section, you need to specify which scale you are using for temperature.

The word order can be changed in the first sentence of the Radical Ring-Opening Polymerization to make it clearer. The second sentence is great.

The first sentence in Mechanism is repetitive. You said in free radical ROP then in radical ROP. The examples after the mechanism are out of place.

The initiation and propagation topics are explained well for AROP. The transfer and termination topic is very confusing. I think you may have added two sentences together because you have some words that are capitalized that do not need to be capitalized.

I am not sure why the organization of the Cationic Ring-Opening Polymerization subject is different from the AROP subject. You also changed how you capitalized the title between the two. The initiation, propagation, and termination for CROP is well written.

The copolymerization topic seems to be missing a lot of citations. You give the BL/CL example but there are no citations supporting any of the information that you provided.

The ROMP topic is well written but it is lacking a mechanism. It also seems to be more about the catalysts of ROMP rather than ROMP.

Figures

The figures look good but you do not have a mechanism for copolymerization nor for ROMP.

References

You have a nice mix of references. You did not link any of your journal papers to the actual paper. It is also nice to link to the abstract because anyone can read the abstract because there are no pay walls.

Overall Presentation

There were clear improvements over the previous version. Some of the sentences are awkwardly worded and need to be revised. A lot of the mistakes are grammar and punctuation. You have a lot of content but it needs better organization.

Ryan's Peer Review
Rasssar (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Content

The introduction was slightly confusing and perhaps too technical for a lay-person to understand. Adding a little more explanation to the part where you mention “ionic propagation” may help (or even a quick picture may be clarifying enough). Also, I think the last sentence of the introduction requires a citation.

The size/detail/scope of most paragraphs seems appropriate, except that compared to the other syntheses described, anionic ring-opening polymerization is given rather little detail. You may want to consider elaborating further on this topic and/or adding a picture as you did in the radical and cationic polymerization descriptions.

Most relevant concepts with other Wikipedia pages were appropriately linked, but I think it was mentioned that we shouldn’t link to dead-pages (i.e. if the Wikipedia page being linked doesn’t exist, don’t hyperlink to it).

The examples used, especially in the form of figures/mechanisms/schemes really helped clarify the points of each paragraph. Also, all the content did not seem duplicative or to copy any of the linked/cited/already existent material.

Figures

For the most part, the figures and equations added were very helpful and very well made. The few comments and suggestions I do have on them are made below so that they can be more easily understood.

References

There is a good mix of journal and non-journal sources present for this article. I may be mistaken, but I think the way you cited some of the journals is incorrect – try using the DOI from the article and have Wikipedia auto-cite it. For example, reference 5 I think is trying to cite this publication (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pol.1957.1202510909/abstract), and using the DOI to create the reference, it is auto-cited by Wikipedia as:

Tobolsky, A. V. (July 1957). "Equilibrium polymerization in the presence of an ionic initiator". Journal of Polymer Science 25 (109): 220–221. doi:10.1002/pol.1957.1202510909

So it may be best to go back and properly cite the journals.

Overall Presentation

Overall the page appears very well-made and only a few changes seem necessary to be made in order to make this a really great page! You may also want to go back through and proof read for grammar and punctuation correctness, there were several errors throughout the article.

Good job overall!

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction


 * see above comments in the content section.

2. History


 * Needs source: “…dates back to the work in 1906 by Leuchs.”
 * Needs source: “The first high molecular weight poly(alkylene phosphate) was prepared by ROP in 1976.”
 * Needs source: “Recently, development of novel monomers and catalysts has enabled polymer chemists to control molecular weights, structure, and configuration of the polymers precisely”

3. Thermodynamics and Kinetics 3.1 Thermodynamics
 * The parentheticals used in the first sentence are incredibly confusing and hard to follow, you may want to consider rewording or restructuring that part.
 * You should clarify on the units used for the equations you present.
 * In the second equation you should define what M, mi, and m* stand for and their units
 * Do equations require citations? I’m not sure, but if they do, they are lacking them.
 * Also as a more general note for this section: if the major heading is “Thermodynamics and Kinetics” why is there only a thermodynamics subsection?

4. Radical Ring-Opening Polymerization a.Mechanism b.Examples
 * The arrows used in the figure for scheme 1 are not the appropriate arrows for radical mechanisms; these arrows should be half-arrows. You may also want to consider enlarging the radical electron dot, it’s pretty small…The arrows for the 3rd structure in this scheme, with the arrow with two arrow heads on it would not be the correct arrow to use even if it was half-arrows.
 * Scheme 2 gets the half-arrows correct. Though the arrow pushing doesn't quite add up for this mechanism (i.e. there should be three arrows in the first step, only two are shown, same as in the third step)

5. Anionic Ring-Opening Polymerization a.Initiation b.Propagation c.Transfer and Termination
 * As mentioned in the first section of my comment, this section may benefit from a picture or a little more explanation.

6. Cationic ring-opening polymerization a.Initiation b.Propagation c.Termination
 * The arrows in this figure also don’t add up (i.e. the first step should have a 2-arrow pushing mechanism, not just 1 arrow)

7.Copolymerization

8.Ring-Opening Metathesis Polymerization a.Catalysts for ROMP

9.Further reading

10.References
 * See above section for the issues with the journal citations.

Rasssar (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review
vechoe (talk)

Content

The introductory section might be difficult for non-experts to understand, especially when "cleavage of the ring" is mentioned. A picture might be useful here. Each section seemed to be the appropriate except there was a big difference between the length of the anionic synthesis and the others. It was the only one without a chemdraw figure, which might be helpful to include. To aid non-experts, maybe include hyperlinks to "ionic propagation" and "catalysts." Beyond that, just removing the dead links would help as there are many. The examples used and section organization makes the page very readable. The sections also make sense as to why they were chosen-based on the different types of ROPs. When compared to the existing page, there is definitely a lot more relevant and desired information.

Figures

The figures are nice, easy to read, and guide readers appropriately. It might be helpful to separate the equations in a way that explains what the equations represent, specifically the three after the heading "At equilibrium (ΔGp = 0)..."

References

There is a good mix of journal and non-journal sources. I would double check the citations that were mentioned by the previous reviewer.

Overall Presentation

In the Thermodynamics and Kinetics sections, there is no kinetics subsection. I would include one or remove "Kinetics" from the section title. As far as the synthesis sections go, it might be beneficial to add examples to each of the sections, like you did for the radical ROP. I liked that you included the main articles, but still made more clarifications in addition to what the other main pages offered.

Overall, it is a very readable and high-quality page. The formatting makes it easy for a reader to obtain the desired information and be on their way. Great job!

Vechoe (talk) 14:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)vechoe

Instructor Comments
Unfortunately, two of your peer reviews are quite short. I have asked one of them to write a more substantial one and post it by 12 noon tomorrow (March 4th). The intro definitely needs a generic figure that gets the idea across and perhaps a few more sentences to clarify the concept. Right now the sentences that are there are too technical for a general audience. Think about explaining the concept to your parents. Each section should have a figure of either a generic or representative example. I found the thermodynamics section to be clunky. Is this somewhere else on Wikipedia that you could simply link to? At the least, I would move it to the end of the page so that the focus is on the synthetic methods. UMChemProfessor (talk) 16:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions from ChemLibrarian
A few more suggestions here.
 * There are many red internal links in your article. Some of them can be corrected. For example, "vinyl polymerization" in the first paragraph of History can be linked to Vinyl polymer with syntax like
 * You may adjust the size and location of some images to make the article looks flowing better. See Picture tutorial for tips.
 * The format of the pictures are not consistent too. It's recommended to use either .png or .svg format for better resolution and online display.
 * The mechanism sections (radical, Anionic, Cationic etc.) could be combined into one Level 2 section. Your probably do not need sub-sections under each type of mechanism.

ChemLibrarian (talk) 17:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)