This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Optical property | |
---|---|
Refractive index | ? for 589.2
nm (nD) ? for 486.1 nm (nF) ? for 656.3 nm (nC) |
V-number | ? |
Physchim62 deleted these. So I want to know why I cannot add these.. by Weihao.chiu 15:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I am busy reverting another well meant example of table creep: External links do not work well in tables (they get expanded by some explorers when the table is printed), and to place them there is contrary to the MoS. They should go in the External links section at the bottom of the article. Physchim62 (talk) 10:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Should InChi's be added to the Chembox underneath SMILES? It would make google searching an InChi pull up the wiki page which would be usefull.
For details about InChi see http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/inchifaq/ (the InChi FAQ)
Except where otherwise noted, data are given for materials in their
standard state (at 25 °C [77 °F], 100 kPa).
|
Thanks to all who have worked on transcludable versions of the chembox: I am pleased to announce the arrival of {{ chembox new}}, which is a fully transcludable version with all parameters optional. This means that the default version is as right! I have included all parameters used in chemboxes, and also some found in {{ drugbox}} and {{ explosivebox}}, in order to ensure the compatibility with existing versions. The same template can be used for both "simple" and "full" chemboxes. The appearance of the chembox is unchanged from the current versions. See {{ chembox subst}} for a list of parameters. Enjoy! Physchim62 (talk) 07:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Anyone know what's wrong with this article? -- M1ss1ontomars2k4 05:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
The MSDS link in the template is written like an internal link with double cornered brackets. Why is that? Do you expect people to copy the MDSD to the wikipedia possibly infringing on copyrights? May this should be changed to external link. I just used the chembox from HCl. Jasu 11:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a problem with one of the struck Ws in this section, but I don't know enough about the language to fix it. ejstheman 04:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
When should chemboxes be used? This article says it should be used with all chemical articles, but does that include alloys? I am aware of the drugbox and the explosivebox and the elementbox, but what about alloys and dyes? What if I come across drugs article with no box at all? what about ones where the line of distinction is blurred (eg. ascorbic acid). Is it ok to replace old style chemboxes? mastodon 14:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Can someone fix the box in Ethylene glycol? — Omegatron 03:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
It is recomended that the template Template:Chembox new is used.
Hi all, I saw that User:BetacommandBot started subst-ing the template last night, I have reverted the edits, and blocked the template from substing by betacommanderbot. I am sorry, but I like it in a non-subst way, since it is more easy to see what is there, and it is a lot less code on the page. Any comments? -- Dirk Beetstra T C 09:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I am trying dry runs in which I try to replace old 'chemical boxes' with the 'chembox new' (see User:Beetstra/Chemical; don't worry, I won't press save until controversy over this new chemobx is over, and if I do, either this rule will be turned of, or I will revert). But I encounter many problems. I will list problems here:
Could someone look into this? -- Dirk Beetstra T C 10:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
See section 1 and section 13 above how the discussion stood. Indeed some articles have been provided with a new chembox, but these were merely try-outs by PC while developing the transcluded version, and some new people in the WP:Chem project not aware of this point. IIRC, there were several important issues:
IMHO, there has been no further discussion on the chembox, hence the decision of the Chemicals wikiprojects still stands at the fixed wikitable. Wim van Dorst ( Talk) 23:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC).
Not sure exactly what substs the bot was making in the above discussion, so I'll just ask straight-out: are we preferring to subst:chembox or just template:chembox unsubstituted? To fix a spacing inconsistency/ style issue, I found three different templates all explicitly contained the same footer, and now I see that lots of pages have been subst'ed so the fix will have to be done manually in each page. DMacks 20:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I realize that the chemical infobox usually expands to the width of the longest line. Can we set a default width of perhaps 300 or 350 px in the template to be substituted such that long lines will wrap automatically? This is more aesthetically pleasing than the use of manual line breaks which result in poorly aligned lines. -- Rifleman 82 19:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
{| class="toccolours" border="1" width="300" style="float: right; clear: right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; border-collapse: collapse;"
I've tested this on Firefox and IE on Windows XP and they both work fine. Would you like to test it out on your system? -- Rifleman 82 22:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Using "molecular formula" as an entry for non-molecular solids such as sodium chloride and silicon dioxide is not strictly correct. An option would be to use a different term such as "empirical formula" when necessary, but I think it would be easier to use a more generic term in all cases, such as "formula" or "chemical formula". Itub 16:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I have added a SMILES based substructure search for eMolecules and PubChem.
Please comment on possible improvements. Things I considered
JKW 14:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm unable to set the image size to anything other than the default 200px. For example, I noticed that acetamide, which uses {{ chembox new}}, has a picture that seems too big to me, so I'd like to shrink it. There is a line in acetamide's chembox that says " ImageFileSize=100|" but it still displays at 200px. The instructions for this template indicates that "ImageFileSize" should be used instead, but when I tried that with various values it still seemed to stay at 200px. Probably I'm just doing something wrong, but perhaps there an error in the template. Can someone please demonstrate to me how to set the image size to something other than the default? Thanks. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 14:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
The {{ chembox new}} has gone through a big revision these last days, I have been trying to get it into a more consistent format, sorting fields, adding fields (see the 'what links here' on chembox new to see some example pages, in the latest format is oligomycin. It is still fully compatible with the old version, since some documents already use the chembox new (migration to the new format might be a good plan ..). I will continue to work on it in the coming time.
To use the new chembox, either do a subst on {{ chembox subst}} (i.e. {{subst:chembox subst}}, save, and edit the page to enter data), or copy the left column from the table at {{ chembox new}} (bottom of that page). There is no need to subst chembox new, better not, since when layout changes on chembox new are performed, all templates transcluding chembox new will have the format changes visible (colours, field order, whatever).
One of the major things that has already been done is that the output of chembox new is now clean, it only shows fields which are supplied, and it only shows the sub-boxes when there is data in that subbox available. The subboxes are now rather esoteric, and I still want to play with some of the functions. They contain some automagic: one example, if "pagename (data page)" exists, the chembox new will now automagically pop up a subbox with some links into that datapage). If something does not work properly, poke me, and I will either help you adapt it (so I am not the only one who can break things .. err .. so others can help me repair things), or try to adapt it for you. Or when you think you can use your magic wand to build in more automagic, please help me (one thing I do not know, is there a check possible if "pagename.svg" exists, and if it exists, then automagically shows that picture as the main picture? Of course images can be supplied by hand, I could also use some help with that .. hmm .. I suddenly have an idea .. I'll keep you posted on that somewhere else).
As said, chembox new consists of subboxes, which are sorted a bit by function, pertaining the above colour-discussion, would it be nice to have the subboxes coloured? Personally I think that would be a bit overdone.
Now I have two questions. First, are there fields missing? If so, then please poke me, and I will make an addition. First, there are fields missing, could you supply me with fields that should be here, from whatever field of chemboxes, or even, help add them to the chembox new? And second, would it be an idea to (slowly) migrate to this chembox, instead of the existing chembox? Thanks! --
Dirk Beetstra
T
C 12:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Optical property | |
---|---|
Refractive index | ? for 589.2
nm (nD) ? for 486.1 nm (nF) ? for 656.3 nm (nC) |
V-number | ? |
Physchim62 deleted these. So I want to know why I cannot add these.. by Weihao.chiu 15:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I am busy reverting another well meant example of table creep: External links do not work well in tables (they get expanded by some explorers when the table is printed), and to place them there is contrary to the MoS. They should go in the External links section at the bottom of the article. Physchim62 (talk) 10:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Should InChi's be added to the Chembox underneath SMILES? It would make google searching an InChi pull up the wiki page which would be usefull.
For details about InChi see http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/inchifaq/ (the InChi FAQ)
Except where otherwise noted, data are given for materials in their
standard state (at 25 °C [77 °F], 100 kPa).
|
Thanks to all who have worked on transcludable versions of the chembox: I am pleased to announce the arrival of {{ chembox new}}, which is a fully transcludable version with all parameters optional. This means that the default version is as right! I have included all parameters used in chemboxes, and also some found in {{ drugbox}} and {{ explosivebox}}, in order to ensure the compatibility with existing versions. The same template can be used for both "simple" and "full" chemboxes. The appearance of the chembox is unchanged from the current versions. See {{ chembox subst}} for a list of parameters. Enjoy! Physchim62 (talk) 07:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Anyone know what's wrong with this article? -- M1ss1ontomars2k4 05:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
The MSDS link in the template is written like an internal link with double cornered brackets. Why is that? Do you expect people to copy the MDSD to the wikipedia possibly infringing on copyrights? May this should be changed to external link. I just used the chembox from HCl. Jasu 11:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a problem with one of the struck Ws in this section, but I don't know enough about the language to fix it. ejstheman 04:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
When should chemboxes be used? This article says it should be used with all chemical articles, but does that include alloys? I am aware of the drugbox and the explosivebox and the elementbox, but what about alloys and dyes? What if I come across drugs article with no box at all? what about ones where the line of distinction is blurred (eg. ascorbic acid). Is it ok to replace old style chemboxes? mastodon 14:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Can someone fix the box in Ethylene glycol? — Omegatron 03:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
It is recomended that the template Template:Chembox new is used.
Hi all, I saw that User:BetacommandBot started subst-ing the template last night, I have reverted the edits, and blocked the template from substing by betacommanderbot. I am sorry, but I like it in a non-subst way, since it is more easy to see what is there, and it is a lot less code on the page. Any comments? -- Dirk Beetstra T C 09:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I am trying dry runs in which I try to replace old 'chemical boxes' with the 'chembox new' (see User:Beetstra/Chemical; don't worry, I won't press save until controversy over this new chemobx is over, and if I do, either this rule will be turned of, or I will revert). But I encounter many problems. I will list problems here:
Could someone look into this? -- Dirk Beetstra T C 10:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
See section 1 and section 13 above how the discussion stood. Indeed some articles have been provided with a new chembox, but these were merely try-outs by PC while developing the transcluded version, and some new people in the WP:Chem project not aware of this point. IIRC, there were several important issues:
IMHO, there has been no further discussion on the chembox, hence the decision of the Chemicals wikiprojects still stands at the fixed wikitable. Wim van Dorst ( Talk) 23:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC).
Not sure exactly what substs the bot was making in the above discussion, so I'll just ask straight-out: are we preferring to subst:chembox or just template:chembox unsubstituted? To fix a spacing inconsistency/ style issue, I found three different templates all explicitly contained the same footer, and now I see that lots of pages have been subst'ed so the fix will have to be done manually in each page. DMacks 20:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I realize that the chemical infobox usually expands to the width of the longest line. Can we set a default width of perhaps 300 or 350 px in the template to be substituted such that long lines will wrap automatically? This is more aesthetically pleasing than the use of manual line breaks which result in poorly aligned lines. -- Rifleman 82 19:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
{| class="toccolours" border="1" width="300" style="float: right; clear: right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; border-collapse: collapse;"
I've tested this on Firefox and IE on Windows XP and they both work fine. Would you like to test it out on your system? -- Rifleman 82 22:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Using "molecular formula" as an entry for non-molecular solids such as sodium chloride and silicon dioxide is not strictly correct. An option would be to use a different term such as "empirical formula" when necessary, but I think it would be easier to use a more generic term in all cases, such as "formula" or "chemical formula". Itub 16:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I have added a SMILES based substructure search for eMolecules and PubChem.
Please comment on possible improvements. Things I considered
JKW 14:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm unable to set the image size to anything other than the default 200px. For example, I noticed that acetamide, which uses {{ chembox new}}, has a picture that seems too big to me, so I'd like to shrink it. There is a line in acetamide's chembox that says " ImageFileSize=100|" but it still displays at 200px. The instructions for this template indicates that "ImageFileSize" should be used instead, but when I tried that with various values it still seemed to stay at 200px. Probably I'm just doing something wrong, but perhaps there an error in the template. Can someone please demonstrate to me how to set the image size to something other than the default? Thanks. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 14:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
The {{ chembox new}} has gone through a big revision these last days, I have been trying to get it into a more consistent format, sorting fields, adding fields (see the 'what links here' on chembox new to see some example pages, in the latest format is oligomycin. It is still fully compatible with the old version, since some documents already use the chembox new (migration to the new format might be a good plan ..). I will continue to work on it in the coming time.
To use the new chembox, either do a subst on {{ chembox subst}} (i.e. {{subst:chembox subst}}, save, and edit the page to enter data), or copy the left column from the table at {{ chembox new}} (bottom of that page). There is no need to subst chembox new, better not, since when layout changes on chembox new are performed, all templates transcluding chembox new will have the format changes visible (colours, field order, whatever).
One of the major things that has already been done is that the output of chembox new is now clean, it only shows fields which are supplied, and it only shows the sub-boxes when there is data in that subbox available. The subboxes are now rather esoteric, and I still want to play with some of the functions. They contain some automagic: one example, if "pagename (data page)" exists, the chembox new will now automagically pop up a subbox with some links into that datapage). If something does not work properly, poke me, and I will either help you adapt it (so I am not the only one who can break things .. err .. so others can help me repair things), or try to adapt it for you. Or when you think you can use your magic wand to build in more automagic, please help me (one thing I do not know, is there a check possible if "pagename.svg" exists, and if it exists, then automagically shows that picture as the main picture? Of course images can be supplied by hand, I could also use some help with that .. hmm .. I suddenly have an idea .. I'll keep you posted on that somewhere else).
As said, chembox new consists of subboxes, which are sorted a bit by function, pertaining the above colour-discussion, would it be nice to have the subboxes coloured? Personally I think that would be a bit overdone.
Now I have two questions. First, are there fields missing? If so, then please poke me, and I will make an addition. First, there are fields missing, could you supply me with fields that should be here, from whatever field of chemboxes, or even, help add them to the chembox new? And second, would it be an idea to (slowly) migrate to this chembox, instead of the existing chembox? Thanks! --
Dirk Beetstra
T
C 12:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)