This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Under WHAT specific conditions does this have a half life of 36 minutes? "Reductive" is too vague. Walkerma ( talk) 03:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hexachloroethane. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
I added a sourced, if brief, section about its use against protesters. This was removed without explanation. I have restored it. If anyone has any reason to remove it, please explain. 138.88.18.245 ( talk) 23:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
It's unclear to me why this well-sourced, factually accurate, and socially relevant usage of HC would be in dispute according to any of the Wikipedia guidelines. Inclusion of this content demonstrably improved the relevance and information content of the article. Indeed, the sentence citing Steinritz et al, which precedes the section in question, gives the explicit impression that "Most Western Countries" have gotten rid of it. And yet here is the US not only using it, but using it on its own public. The significance of its use was detailed extensively in the cited sources, anyone who questions the important of the information would do well by reading the links (which are summarized sufficiently in the proposed text). Especially given the social relevance of the deployment of federal agents during Portland Oregon's 2020 protests, there is overwhelming evidence of the improvement of the article by its inclusion. It's not clear to me what else consensus would need to be reached on. I'm pretty new to editing Wikipedia, so I'm not changing any main text here, but I give a +1 to the edits that @ Laval: had most recently up Juniperlsimonis ( talk) 07:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)juniperlsimonis
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Under WHAT specific conditions does this have a half life of 36 minutes? "Reductive" is too vague. Walkerma ( talk) 03:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hexachloroethane. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
I added a sourced, if brief, section about its use against protesters. This was removed without explanation. I have restored it. If anyone has any reason to remove it, please explain. 138.88.18.245 ( talk) 23:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
It's unclear to me why this well-sourced, factually accurate, and socially relevant usage of HC would be in dispute according to any of the Wikipedia guidelines. Inclusion of this content demonstrably improved the relevance and information content of the article. Indeed, the sentence citing Steinritz et al, which precedes the section in question, gives the explicit impression that "Most Western Countries" have gotten rid of it. And yet here is the US not only using it, but using it on its own public. The significance of its use was detailed extensively in the cited sources, anyone who questions the important of the information would do well by reading the links (which are summarized sufficiently in the proposed text). Especially given the social relevance of the deployment of federal agents during Portland Oregon's 2020 protests, there is overwhelming evidence of the improvement of the article by its inclusion. It's not clear to me what else consensus would need to be reached on. I'm pretty new to editing Wikipedia, so I'm not changing any main text here, but I give a +1 to the edits that @ Laval: had most recently up Juniperlsimonis ( talk) 07:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)juniperlsimonis