tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post62494969930949810..comments2024-03-28T07:04:52.697-04:00Comments on Just Like Cooking: Déjà vu, LPUSee Arr Ohhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09464185815368499346noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-45709081706826398332014-08-04T06:07:41.381-04:002014-08-04T06:07:41.381-04:00Another similar papers - I think even more bold th...Another similar papers - I think even more bold than those mentioned here:<br />http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/anie.201406594/abstract<br />http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja506823uAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09014235237553552368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-62738408290652080382014-07-28T09:30:47.367-04:002014-07-28T09:30:47.367-04:00The two procedures being written in a consistent w...The two procedures being written in a consistent way is not a problem in itself, but it does highlight the real problem: the two procedures are virtually identical, the only differences being 130 vs 110 °C and the enantiomer of the ligand. This certainly makes me think that the lactone reaction isn't something that they developed after the ketone reaction (you know, having to screen different conditions and optimise to get it to work), but just an addendum to the substrate scope of the first paper.<br /><br />(Hardly the only example of that kind of thing, granted.)fluorogrolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10923664308885968709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-33834298246659827412014-07-28T08:18:27.302-04:002014-07-28T08:18:27.302-04:00I totally don't see the point here, nor I saw ...I totally don't see the point here, nor I saw it in february. Experimental procedures are always written the same way over and over. If he can manage to publish his work in ACIE in such a consistent way, maybe it's because his work is really relevant. Am I missing something?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-49604354127004118352014-07-28T04:31:40.354-04:002014-07-28T04:31:40.354-04:00Anonymous is right. The official name of the journ...Anonymous is right. The official name of the journal changed in 1998, they dropped the 'English' from the end. So your abbreviation is correct when referencing papers from '97 or earlier (although it should be 'Engl.', not 'Eng.'), but anything from '98 onwards is correctly cited as Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. or ACIE.<br /><br />Now, whether 'Chem.' should be followed by a comma… a can of worms best avoided.fluorogrolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10923664308885968709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-71216322005705742002014-07-25T13:26:14.616-04:002014-07-25T13:26:14.616-04:00The last "E" is for English, and since I...The last "E" is for English, and since I still have to write out "Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Eng." in footnotes, I'm still gonna call it that. But, point taken! : )See Arr Ohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09464185815368499346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-83288217197311044572014-07-25T11:40:05.308-04:002014-07-25T11:40:05.308-04:00Hey gramps ! It's no longer ACIEE, changed in ...Hey gramps ! It's no longer ACIEE, changed in 1998 (FYI it's ACIE). Stay updated ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6010505890506526002.post-52661403150386018152014-07-25T06:31:18.000-04:002014-07-25T06:31:18.000-04:00Yes, I would agree that this is unnecessarily frag...Yes, I would agree that this is unnecessarily fragmented.<br /><br />Trouble is, people respond to incentives, and the relevant incentive here is to publish as many papers in high-impact journals as you can, not to publish the best papers you can. If you can slice one piece of work such that you can get two Angewandtes for the price of one, readers may not thank you, but your career probably will.<br /><br />Of course, that an incentive exists doesn't mean you should pursue it at all cost, but human nature and all that. To me this is just a symptom of a funding/recognition system that leans too heavily on flawed metrics.fluorogrolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10923664308885968709noreply@blogger.com