Talk:Ethylene

message: A google search of "cycloethane" gives a lot of questions (more questions than answers).  I did my due diligence and found a respectable source for this rare/controversial term.  I updated this page with info about this term.  I did NOT put this in the headline... in fact it appeared near the END of the page!  I also included objections to this term BEFORE the justification.  But almost immediately (within 10 minutes) after posting, my edit was reversed by *classified*.
I posted this edit with a verifiable source.  I also included objections AND justifications in my edit to provide a fair-and-balanced view of the term "cycloethane".
Yet my edit was almost immediately retracted.  This isn't how Wikipedia should work, IMHO.
Sure, if I was just giving my personal opinion, or if I was just giving the "google" opinion then this would be understandable.
But if I post an edit with a reliable/verifiable source, shouldn't this be AT LEAST open for debate... instead of immediate deletion?
Because my original post was deleted, I can't be 100% sure, but I believe my edit was approximately:
    "Ethylene is rarely (and controversially) named 'cycloethane'.  It is controversial because... It is justified because..."
    [with reference to "Basic Principles of Organic Chemistry" (second edition, page 483, ISBN 0-8053-8329-8)]
For the love of God, what was wrong with my edit?  Except for being unpopular??  Can we talk about this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hydradix (talk • contribs) 21:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Cycloethane

message: Are you sure the stuff that dandilions release (ethylene) is the same substance that can be found from crude oil? Qwertyxp2000 (talk) 05:07, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dandilions 

message: "Ethylene biosynthesis can be induced by endogenous or exogenous ethylene."
this sentence seems to be flawed, as it means effectively that ethylene production in a plant will be triggered by the presence of ethylene (either produced by the same plant, or coming from somewhere else). so it means once there is ethylene present there will be more of it produced, but this fails to account for what started the process to start with and also suggests that it is a self-inducing chain reaction while the same is not said by the previous - more detailed - part of the desription of the process. please remove and/or make more clear this sentence.80.98.114.70 (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ethylene synthesis in plants 

message: Substituted at 14:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ethylene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060903081507/http://www.chem.yale.edu/~chem125/125/history99/5Valence/Nomenclature/Hofmannaeiou.html to http://www.chem.yale.edu/~chem125/125/history99/5Valence/Nomenclature/Hofmannaeiou.html
*Added  tag to http://ecb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/iuclid-datasheet/74851.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061113092037/http://www.novachem.com/ProductServices/docs/Ethylene_MSDS_EN.pdf to http://www.novachem.com/productservices/docs/Ethylene_MSDS_EN.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: = due to the 2× bond. So we can write:
*= +→ - + E
*- + E → = +
Alfa-ketosav (talk) 15:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The simplified formula is just an... 

message: It's a long time since I studied chemistry, but I'm surprised that Ethene redirects to Ethylene, rather than the other way around. Ethene has been the IUPAC name for this compound for a long time now and while ethylene may be in more common use, I cannot see that being a good argument for not listing a chemical compound under its official name.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.154.136 (talk) 02:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia titles articles by their common name (see WP:COMMONNAME).  For this reason many (most?) articles about chemical compounds are not titled using IUPAC nomenclature.  ChemNerd (talk) 16:08, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Ethene not the main entry? 

message: The role of ethylene as a plant hormone is a big area and pretty different from the usual chemical/petrochemical aspects. Also it looks like increasing amount of primary literature is creeping into article.  So if we split, readers might find the info more useful.  The parent article would of course retain brief mention of the hormone aspect.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal

message: Hazchem  code 2409:4071:D81:B5D5:3947:F549:5D75:618D (talk) 08:13, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethylene