User talk:RFZYNSPY

The Signpost: 25 April 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Botulism immune globulin
Hello, RFZYNSPY. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Botulism immune globulin, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:07, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 June 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Please revise thymol biosynthesis scheme
The last step should have a simple arrow. --Smokefoot (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I changed the image to have an equilibrium arrow instead of a resonance arrow. The reason I chose a resonance arrow is that it was what was used in the referenced article. I appreciate the attention to my image, but if in the future I make harmless typographical errors please consider keeping the image up while it's discussed. RFZYN SPY  talk 07:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Why suggest that an alkyl phenol exists in significant equilibrium with the enone? Smokefoot (talk) 11:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that's a question for the authors of the original article. I'm reluctant to change the arrow further because if the only justification for doing so is that Wikipedia editors predict $$k_1>>k_{-1}$$ I don't think we'd be following WP:NOR. RFZYN SPY  talk 20:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Really? Our phenol article say K = 10-13 for typical phenols.  Furthermore, the authors of that lovely PNAS paper are probably biochemists after all.  Almost always they are mediocre at chem (after all, they were the ones that used the awful double arrow implying resonance!).  Enough, good luck. --Smokefoot (talk) 21:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One guess is maybe they were trying to leave open the possibility of an enzymatic effect stabilizing the enone? But that seems like a further leap than the case in which they just recognized it as tautomerization and slapped on a double headed arrow. I agree with you on the chemistry, though, and I appreciate the attention to detail. RFZYN SPY  talk 21:25, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2024
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)