User talk:Cnsghkch

Thanks. I am a keen advocate of Wikipedia. I have started to donate to Wikipedia since last year. I know certain aspects of chemistry reasonably well. So I am happy to help as much as I can.
 * Sorry about what I did inappropriately. It was not an on purpose ignorance of the rules but just not knowing them.
 * I did not take away or replace the Chemical Review paper. However, as you have mentioned it, it is absolutely irrelevant to the drawings shown in that page. It contains nothing about what you read about in the GVL Wikipedia page. The full name or acronym of GVL was mentioned once in that review article. What it sure is that the mechanism of the conversion is unknown. The scheme is nothing more than a hypothesis with no evidence at all.
 * Actually, the green chemistry paper I added is a highly cited paper. The average Citations per Year is 17. It inspired and initiated all those researches mentioned. I just hope people could respect the history and learn chemistry correctly.

I appreciate all your kindness and helps. I accept your suggestion. I will be more considerate in the future.

Welcome but be careful
Hi, it looks like you know some advanced chemistry, and we seek editors who will share their knowledge by improving articles for our readers. SInce you are new, here are a few guidelines that you might be unfamiliar with
 * For references, we prefer secondary sources, meaning reviews and books.
 * We mainly avoid certain features of blogs and technical review articles, such as not praising people. What you wrote in the GVL article is pretty inappropriate for Wikipedia (but would be ideal for an award nomination!).
 * Wikipedia steers away from the very most recent research since we are not a news reporting mechanism. We do not aspire to replace Chemical Reviews etc, we are looking for seasoned references, if we can find them.  In this context, well established reviews exist on GVL without needed to cite recent articles in specialized journals like Green Chemistry.  Sorry to disappoint you, many new editors are confused about this aspect since journal articles are so prevalent.
 * Please also be careful about conflict of interest. If you are associated with Dr. Horvath, then it is probably a good idea NOT to edit articles related to him or his work.  I hope that you are motivated to help Wikipedia, not just highlight contributions from one research group.

WIth best wishes (and available to help with your future edits), --Smokefoot (talk) 14:08, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. Green Chemistry is a primary (i.e. specialized) journal. If you are monitoring the citation rate of this article, then you are almost certainly subject to a CP:COI.  I hope that you indeed prove to be a "keen advocate of Wikipedia"  by editing topics that are not related to Horvath. --Smokefoot (talk) 12:21, 5 November 2012 (UTC)