This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Articles for creation This redirect was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles This redirect was accepted on 1 January 2013 by reviewer FoCuSandLeArN ( talk · contribs). Chemistry This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles

The contents of the Homogeneous hydrogenation catalysis page were merged into Hydrogenation on 24 June 2016‎ and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.

One possible trajectory for this homework essay is to use it as a starting point for an article on homogenous catalytic hydrogenation. There is no reason to disparage this thing, but we do not want to encourage a series on [your-metal-here]-catalyzed hydrogenation. If other editors have questions or concerns let me know. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 09:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Having looked at it, our article on hydrogenation is already well divided into homogeneous and heterogeneous sections. So we would have to be careful not to have this end-up as a content fork. Homogeneous hydrogenation catalysts are becoming more important industrially, particularly Rh,Ru,Ir- diphosphines, as they can work at loading of 0.01 mol% or below.-- Project Osprey ( talk) 15:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Oh, good thoughts. I was feeling horrified with the predecessor article but should have looked around. Maybe we should redirect this thing to there. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 17:26, 23 June 2016 (UTC) reply

That seems like a better option; once you take out the lead and generalized-comments, the remaining info is small enough to merged sensibly. I think the hydrogenation article could also do with a revamp, like a lot of our older top-level pages it's seen years of minor edits which have resulted in it becoming quite disjointed. -- Project Osprey ( talk) 10:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply