Talk:Ergoline

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Chemistry Portal Ergoline is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Article Grading: The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article..

This article is part of the WikiProject on Psychedelics, Dissociatives and Deliriants, set up to organize and expand entries on Psychedelics, dissociatives and deliriants as well as related subjects according to chemical type, effects, organic carriers, and cultural/historical uses. Please feel free to participate by editing this article and visiting the project page.

The rest naming and numbering is misleading and not standard. The images should be redrawn, rest names should be R¹ (indole-1 position), R^amide (amide N-substituent)... Cacycle 19:24, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Split

I oppose the splitting off of information on the ergoline derivatives. Most of the article is about them, including most of the material that was not split off. At the least, the splitted article should not be orphaned as it currently is. I'm going to re-insert the material just to make it available until either the split is abandonded or someone can re-craft the main article to properly refer to the derivatives article.--Russell E 11:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not see why there should be an article 'ergoline derivatives', if this article just gets a {{chembox new}}/{{drugbox}}, then all the derivatives can get a link there (field Other Compounds), and this directory like information can just go. This article is about the main ergoline, an article on all the derivatives is going to be a huge list of compounds, seen the number of possible substituents. Most of the articles mentioned here have an own article anyway, and the rest should have (one could consider a category for them, of course). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:00, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Moreover, most are already in the {{ergolines}}-box at the bottom. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 12:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)