Jump to content

Talk:Mustard oil bomb

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move request

[edit]

This is obviously a stub. As the topic is covered much more detailed in the article "glucosinolate", I would recommend deleting this article completely. Furthermore, whereas the mustard oil bomb is an established term (and so is "the glucosinolate-myrosinase system"), the name of this article (the glucosinolate-myrosinase complex) is not an established term. Specifically, the two do not form any sort of long-lived complex, as soon as the two chemicals meet, a reaction happens and the glucosinolate is hydrolyzed. A complex in chemistry and biochemistry is an association by non-covalent bonds of some stability in terms of time. I am the author of around 35 scientific papers on glucosinolates, and I feel quite sure that most scientists in the field would agree with the above. Sincerely Yours, Niels AgerbirkNiels Agerbirk (talk) 19:21, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To start, does your intended target article contain all the info that is contained in this source article? --Acyclic (talk) 04:23, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
After no response to the request for deletion, I have progressed. As the article can also be reached from an established term, the mustard oil bomb, I have briefly adapted the article to be scientifically sound ad correct, and to explain the term mustard oil bomb. It is still a parallel article to glucosinolate, but makes some sense in explaining the term mustard oil bomb. Can someone delete the title Glucosinolate-myrosinase complex and insert the title mustard oil bomb? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niels Agerbirk (talkcontribs) 19:48, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, now I see the answer from Acyclic: Yes the glucosinolate article contains what is needed, except reference 1 which is not a vital reference. However, if we could keep the mustard oil bomb article, it can be worked into a brief article explaining this phenomenon, with the glucosinolate article being more comprehensive. I think that would make some sense for readers. Niels Agerbirk (talk) 19:54, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Moved as requested. --Acyclic (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]