Talk:Βk-2C-B

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article 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.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsWikipedia:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsTemplate:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsPsychoactive and Recreational Drugs articles

Source reliability

Should the (un)reliable source tags be used when the article is regarding an extremely novel substance for which there is no novel data? It was thought that this couldn't exist until a couple of months ago. Testem (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A good lot of the sections have no references at all, I added unreferenced section tag to some of them.

The entire "Structure activity relationships" section sounds like a good, yet unspecific/unsubstantiated hypothesis. DefinitelyNotAScientist (talk) 22:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct name

This article should at least display the name as βk-2C-B, even if naming rules prevent it being located there.

structure

Structure presented is 2,6 dimethoxy and not drawn in the correct position of 2,5...24.78.65.103 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

...no it isn't? Testem (talk) 11:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-- The structure has the methoxys at the 3 and 6 positions and should be corrected 188.250.16.227 (talk) 12:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's also not correct... Testem (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's really the wrong structure, please edit this 217.229.104.118 (talk) 20:13, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct structure? Testem (talk) 13:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the chemical name given in the text for reference 1 is correct, and I see no reason why it should not be, then the structure shown in this article is correct. RaynesParkGuy (talk) 10:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]