User talk:Ajc540/sandbox

Intro

• line 1: “describeds”

• equation: maybe describe where these numbers and the equation come from

History

• “The reaction is reversible, slightly exothermic, becoming less so with increasing temperature.” Becoming less reversible or less exothermic with increasing temperature?

• “Research in this area continues to be active field in the present day” grammar issues

• Broken link to “Hydrogen world”

• Paragraph 3, line 1: “…and is becoming an important in both the political…”

• Paragraph 3, last line: used “WGS” instead of “WGSR”

Applications

• Industrial, first line, missing a leading noun. “? Is used in…”

• Line 1: random ellipses?

• Line 1-2: “It is often used in conjunction with steam reforming of methane or other hydrocarbons,[1]” Need a period at the end of sentence, not comma. Also, reword this sentence so it is clearer what “steam reforming of methane etc.” means.

• Line 2: what is the Fischer Tropsch Process?

• Line 3-4: “The water-gas shift reaction may be an undesired side reaction in processes involving water and carbon monoxide, e.g. the rhodium-based Monsanto process. The iridium-based Cativa process uses less water, which suppresses this reaction.” This is a repeat of a sentence included in the History section already

• Line 5: ”…equilibrium of this reaction is shows a significant…” grammar

• What are the Monsanto and Cativa processes?

• “…are thermodynamically limited exit composition of 2-4% carbon monoxide.” What?

• “…is employed produce…” (employed TO produce)

• Paragraph 2, line 6, “prioir” = prior*

• Edit superscripts and subscripts (H2O, oC, etc) throughout\

-Above edits suggested by GoBlue18

---

Review from physorg_2013

Content: The introductory section is generally appropriate for non-chemistry experts but the terms “thermodynamically favored” and “kinetically favored” might be unfamiliar to no-experts. They could either be parenthetically defined or linked to another Wikipedia page that explains what these terms mean. None of the sections are unnecessarily long and each is broken into appropriate subsections. As a single reaction, the topic doesn’t lend itself to discussing examples as much as applications and mechanism, but the page discusses good examples and appropriately considers the different mechanisms that have been proposed. The key terms and content are linked to other appropriate Wikipedia pages. One link (hydrogen world) is to a page that does not exist so the link should be either removed or another page to link to should be chosen (Wikipedia has a page on “world hydrogen energy conference,” which is the closest topic that arises from a single Google search). The last section also contains the sentence “Coupling the RWGS with the water electrolysis process, is will yield methane and oxygen,” which should probably read “coupling the RWGS with the water electrolysis process will yield methane and oxygen” unless there was an unfinished thought in it.

Figures: The figures illustrate important concepts for the page but are very small and would be a lot more useful if they were large enough to see the text on them. The figure illustrating the two different mechanisms looks like it is very helpful in distinguishing the two mechanisms but again it needs to be bigger.

References: There are more than eight references and the list does include non-journal sources, but one of the references is incorrectly cited (Wikipedia is showing an error message instead of citation 2). The section on fuel cells has “(Ladebeck)” written at the end of sentences as if it is a reference but this name does not appear in the reference list. The High Temperature Shift Catalysts does the same thing with “(Newsome 1980).” These two sources need full citations in the reference section.

Presentation: Overall the page looks very good. My first suggestion for the presentation would be to make the three figures larger. Chemical formulas should also be fixed to use subscripts and the degree sign should be superscript. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Physorg 2013 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions from ChemLibrarian (talk) 18:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

1. About format -- You do not need to title the first paragraph as Introduction. Just delete the heading "Introduction". People usually know the first paragraph is an overview of the concept.
2. Did you extracted data to plot the figure "Temperature Dependence of Keq"? Please be clear to mention the figure in your text and be explicit about where the data come from. Although data itself is not copyrightable and you can re-plot the extracted data, it is ethical to give credits. And it's easier for people who'd like to read the original work.
3. Please fix the broken citations. Somehow you first citations went to the very beginning before everything else. And the second reference was never defined. Also, under the History section, there are a couple [1][2] seem not really inserted.
4. There are three broken internal links in the Application/Industry section first line. e.g. Should use ammonia.

Suggestions from UMChemProfessor (talk) 19:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Overall, the peer reviews are excellent and should be used to improve your site.

In addition:

1. The "introduction" section is too technical for a high school audience. Major revisions are required.
2. Use K_eq instead of K_equil
3. The figures are too small to be readable.
4. Fix the reference error.
5. Subscripts should be used for things like H₂O.

Response to Peer Review Ajc540 (talk)Zwickipedia (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks you all for your reviews. In general, every grammatical and formatting error listed in the peer review has been fixed. Additional internal links were added for topics that may require further detail (ex. Mosanto process, etc...) Subscripts and superscripts have been fixed. The citations, references and internal Wikipedia links have all been redone and should all be appropriately linked now. The Keq equation was redone into the form the the one we used to plot the curve and the figure is now referenced in the text. We have adjusted the sizing of the figures to, what we think, is a more legible size. The introduction has been adjusted to be less technical and suitable for a more general audience. Originally we had the introduction and the 'History section together as one introduction, but chose to separate them for the sake of keeping the reaction formula separate from some of the general talking points. We have now moved the more technical details, namely the kinetics/thermodynamics, to a later section and recombined the history with the introduction to give a more simplified overview.