User talk:Leeberty84/sandbox

Jeffrey Montano's peer review of Homogeneous catalysis
Intro paragraph More could be added here. It seems like half the paragraph is about heterogeneous catalysis. Perhaps the energetics, or thermodynamics of HC could be mentioned. Or, explain why HC could be a desirable approach to an experiment or synthesis. Are there any benefits of having one phase rather than multiple? “Homogeneous catalysis applies to reactions in the gas phase and even in solids.” This sentence is a bit ambiguous. “and even solids” as though the reader may assume HC doesn’t apply to solids. Does HC apply to the liquid phase? Also, the word “catalytic” should be added: “Homogeneous catalysis applies to ’catalytic’ reactions in the gas phase and even in solids.” The last sentence: “Enzymes are examples of homogeneous catalysts” seems out of place. Especially, since the very next section is “examples” and enzymes are mentioned in that section.

The examples section is extensive, and the examples are well selected and described. An interesting addition to the sections could be a “techniques” section that possibly cite certain lab practices when carrying out a homogeneous catalytic reaction. The final section “Contrast with heterogeneous catalysis” I think is necessary, but again, it weighs the article more on heterogeneous catalysis. Expansion of the opening paragraph may remedy this.

Good work so far! Jeffrey Montano (talk) 16:14, 15 February 2019 (UTC)Jeffrey Montano

Sebastian's Peer Review
For the lead section, I feel that it is easy to understand. However, I would try to add examples of some significant applications of this process so that the reader can have a better idea of where this topic would be important. The structure of the article is clear and easy to follow. If you feel there is enough information about the history of the topic, it would be good to include some highlights in the past that made this topic become important. Currently, it seems like the article is skewed towards the "Examples" section, though that may be justified. I would add some information to other sections or add more sections so that it doesn't seem like that article is only about the applications of homogeneous catalysis. The article appears to be neutral and have reliable sources so far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebastian55tang (talk • contribs) 23:48, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Seongbeom's Response
1. More could be added here: Thank for your review. I have added more explanation to the introduction section based on your suggestions including energetics and thermodynamics.

2. The last sentence: “Enzymes are examples of homogeneous catalysts” seems out of place: Thanks for your suggestions. I have revised the sentence.

3. I would try to add examples of some significant applications: Thanks of your valuable suggestions. I have added more examples of significant applications including phytocatalytic artificial synthesis.

4. I would add some information to other sections or add more sections : Thanks for your review. As of now, I am addressing what additional imformation would be beneficial for users. I will update it soon.

Eddie Wardwell Peer Review
Hi,

Starting from the beginning, I think that the first two sentences are somewhat repetitive. Consider scrapping the first sentence and begin with the second before going on, and maybe combine this sentence with the sentence that introduces heterogeneous catalysis: "Homogeneous catalysis refers to catalytic reactions where the catalyst is in the same phase as the reactants, as opposed to heterogeneous catalysis which is..."

I also am unclear whether or not homogeneous catalysis is able to occur in the liquid stage, and if not, why? Also, in this introduction, you could consider adding a history of homogeneous catalysis, including examples of important discoveries or past uses. Also, the last sentence does not really set up the rest of the article; it seems out of place, and could even be added to the sentence prior.

The Advantages and Disadvantages section is fantastic and gives the reader an idea of why the process is used in certain cases and why it is not used in others. I would consider defining "green chemistry," or at least describing why a leftover catalyst is not "green." I am not sure if the source should be cited in the title, maybe cite the source used at the very end of the section. I also feel that some of this information is repeated when you contrast homo- and heterogeneous catalysis. Due to this, I do not believe the last section is entirely necessary.

The "examples" section is quite good and well-organized. It includes fantastic examples, but it doesn't seem to be well-cited.

Other than this, the content is neutral, balanced and well organized.

Good job! Ewardwell (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)