Talk:Frontier molecular orbital theory

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is in really bad shape. Please, someone, bring this attention to your Prof, or a knowledgable professional organic chemis, and ask for guidance to rewrite. Prof D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.94.53 (talk) 03:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Should "*Note: The LUMO of ethene and the HOMO of butadiene are both symmetric"
be "*Note: The HOMO of ethene and the LUMO of butadiene are both symmetric"
for this to be "inverse electron demand Diels–Alder" ?
Inon Sharony ינון שרוני atto.tau.ac.il/~inonshar 16:46, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
In the sigmatropic section, the partition of the molecule as 1-methylbutadiene instead of pentadiene is confusing, and should be clearified. It is not stressed plainly enough that the methyl HOMO and butadiene LUMO of the reactants, and butadiene HOMO of the products, are simply parts of the pentadiene HOMO.
Inon Sharony ינון שרוני atto.tau.ac.il/~inonshar 16:55, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

The conrotatory section has the wrong product... if it was conrotatory the X's would be facing the same direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.160.125.2 (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]