Talk:Glaucarubin

Group #2 Doing the Review

Review #1 Hello, Good start to the Wikipedia page! Overall just add a little more content to the page over all however the ChemBox looks really good. Apart from content two little things caught my eye that should be worked on to make it a little better. Try adding a picture of your molecule to the ChemBox by uploading a file within the toolbox section on the sidebar. You should also touch up your references so that they are in a list and not running on top of one another. On a final note make sure to add in some in-text citations both within your paragraphs and within the ChemBox itself. Matejew2 (talk) 17:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Review #2 Hey, You have a start to the article, but I would appreciate adding more content to the actual article making sure to include credible sources and cite them in the text and chembox. As for the chembox, adding a picture of what Glaucarubin is or looks like would be great. Overall a good start. Chemfox11 (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Review #3 Hello, The page looks good. I would suggest a few things. As they said above, you should probably add more to the article. The Chembox could use an image. You should also probably fix your references. Nice job so far! Emmakepple (talk) 00:29, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

External review

• The discovery would benefit from the mentioning of Gilling in 1908.
• The compound was used for something before
• havoc in a toxicity section looks really odd
• description of cancer is not needed, there is a article for that

--Stone (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

This article is inferior and is not ready to be uploaded

This article, like most from this class, reads poorly and requires major help from a professional chemist. Ask your teacher to contact the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals. Please do not upload this article until it meets our minimal standards----Smokefoot (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)