![]() | 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 2005 | ← | Archive 2010 | Archive 2011 | Archive 2012 |
are no more available, see http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/index2.html. Looks like a lot of work to do... Nice weekend, -- FK1954 ( talk) 19:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:Neon compounds has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Double sharp (
talk) 12:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
I propose that the MeltingPt and BoilingPt fields be altered — that the "−" exchanged for the "–" in cases where a range is displayed. An example: "− # –−%" instead of "− # −−%". Plasmic Physics ( talk) 08:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Ethane. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I've added a section to the "dopaminergic" template; a new section, but I require someone to help me by making the individual articles linked. A good start would be the re-drawing of free-license versions of these compounds/molecules and uploading them: “Agonist” and “Antagonist” Allosteric Modulators of Amphetamine-Induced Dopamine Release. I have recently re-located and do not have access to my chem-draw software, but this would be an important addition to the dopaminergic articles here in Wikipedia's contribution to molecular biology Nagelfar ( talk) 02:00, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Psilocybin was recently promoted to a FA. Right now it has a red X by the CAS number. Could someone make it a green check mark instead? Thanks. Jesanj ( talk) 01:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Organic table information & Inorganic table information. Since you had some involvement with the Organic table information Inorganic table information redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 76.65.128.132 ( talk) 05:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
This might be useful:
1 H |
2 He | ||||||||||||||||
3 Li |
4 Be |
5 B |
6 C |
7 N |
8 O |
9 F |
10 Ne | ||||||||||
11 Na |
12 Mg |
13 Al |
14 Si |
15 P |
16 S |
17 Cl |
18 Ar | ||||||||||
19 K |
20 Ca |
21 Sc |
22 Ti |
23 V |
24 Cr |
25 Mn |
26 Fe |
27 Co |
28 Ni |
29 Cu |
30 Zn |
31 Ga |
32 Ge |
33 As |
34 Se |
35 Br |
36 Kr |
37 Rb |
38 Sr |
39 Y |
40 Zr |
41 Nb |
42 Mo |
43 Tc |
44 Ru |
45 Rh |
46 Pd |
47 Ag |
48 Cd |
49 In |
50 Sn |
51 Sb |
52 Te |
53 I |
54 Xe |
55 Cs |
56 Ba |
* | 72 Hf |
73 Ta |
74 W |
75 Re |
76 Os |
77 Ir |
78 Pt |
79 Au |
80 Hg |
81 Tl |
82 Pb |
83 Bi |
84 Po |
85 At |
86 Rn |
87 Fr |
88 Ra |
** | 104 Rf |
105 Db |
106 Sg |
107 Bh |
108 Hs |
109 Mt |
110 Ds |
111 Rg |
112 Cn |
113 Uut |
114 Fl |
115 Uup |
116 Lv |
117 Uus |
118 Uuo |
* | 57 La |
58 Ce |
59 Pr |
60 Nd |
61 Pm |
62 Sm |
63 Eu |
64 Gd |
65 Tb |
66 Dy |
67 Ho |
68 Er |
69 Tm |
70 Yb |
71 Lu |
** | 89 Ac |
90 Th |
91 Pa |
92 U |
93 Np |
94 Pu |
95 Am |
96 Cm |
97 Bk |
98 Cf |
99 Es |
100 Fm |
101 Md |
102 No |
103 Lr |
Double sharp ( talk) 09:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Looking around for info about drugs for an article I'm writing, I've noticed that we have a lot of articles along the lines of Chemical X (data page). There are 171 pages in Category:Chemical data pages, most of which are separate articles. Personally, I think these don't belong as separate articles. Would anyone object if these were moved to a subpage of the chemical's article's talk page, so Morphine (data page) would be moved to Talk:Morphine/Data page? Given that this involves ~170 pages, I thought I'd bring it here for a discussion about this instead of being bold. Quasi human | Talk 22:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I am finding myself starting a lot of stubs on new chemicals or classes of chemicals (well notable, too). They will always be low view, but are binary compounds and additive to the pedia. I guess maybe DYKing them could be a good objective. That or just stubbing, not sure. DYK has gotten so hard and scary. That said, it pushes me to do more than a cat, a ref, and a sentence.
I guess just looking to get any insights on how to be more efficient.
Will skim the info here. I guess for now, just plan to do cut and paste ffrom existing article (into sandbox), modify to make new one, method of article generation. Just looking for insights to make this easier, less work.
TCO ( talk) 02:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Try searching the German Wikipedia. They might have the equivalent article, and you can translate it as a starting point. You can let us here know of the new articles, and usually those who can will help expand them. Chemspider is good, but do be careful about their "names" list. Journal references are always nice, but if they are in textbooks that's even better since textbooks put them into context whereas journal articles may not do so. Since you are talking about binary compounds, Greenwood, Norman N.; Earnshaw, Alan (1997). Chemistry of the Elements (2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-08-037941-8. is a nice place to start. Inorg. Synth. may tell you how to make them, which is always desirable for a compound. If economically significant, Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3527306732. might discuss the industrial route. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 16:02, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
I just looked at the worklist and it says it is historical only. Think some of the discussion on this page linking to it should change. Feel free to revert of course. TCO ( talk) 04:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. The Style Guide is no longer an Activity in Progress, is it? The box on the upper right corner indicates that Wikipedia:CHEMMOS is the official style guide but the subsection in the body text of the project article says otherwise. If anybody cares to verify that this is no longer an Activity in Progress, I'll make the change. USEPA James ( talk) 21:21, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
For anyone that is interested, there is a discussion about renaming Category:Natural_opium_alkaloids to Category:Opium_alkaloids here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_15#Category:Natural_opium_alkaloids. ChemNerd ( talk) 21:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated for deletion the new chemistry article Tripeptide-37. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripeptide-37. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 13:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a note on well-intentioned but potentially problematic activity by user:NotWith who is carefully listing the phenols detected in some foodstuffs. See [ [1]]. One can reasonably assume that all foods contain thousands of organic compounds, and many major organic compounds are found in thousands or more foods. These edits could go on forever.
I question the value of these additions unless there is something notable about the occurrence of a particular organic compound (like HCN in peach pits, or certain characteristic compounds that powerfully influence flavors or odors or nutrition). Comments from others?-- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:36, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Is the structure shown in Zinc titanate correct? IMHO a crystal structure would be needed for this compound that is in the solid state at room temperature. -- Leyo 19:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The article Hydrochloric acid (data page) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Plasmic Physics (
talk) 08:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
How do you then suppose we fill fields like bond length? The page then becomes a discriminatory list of information. This particular page has not been used since it was created over 5 years ago. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 08:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
There is never a need for sarcasm in a serious situation. Those edits did not fill any entry fields, in fact the page has shrunken since its creation. Redirecting attention, by no means removes the issue. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
OK, that's fine. (It seems odd not to have it for any other data page.) Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
Chembox}}
allows to autogenerate chemical formula by specifying elements (C = 1, H = 2, etc.). This is convenient (mass is auto-calculated and the input is simple) and therefore is used in many articles, but results in weird formulas like Cl3W, etc., because the ordering is alphabetic. This ordering is accepted by suppliers but not scientists. Proposal: change it to the IUPAC system, where the elements are listed in order of their position in the periodic table, read from bottom to top, left to right, and hydrogen between groups 15 and 16. Beetstra suggested to bring this here. Please comment/vote.
Materialscientist (
talk) 07:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm reviving this older discussion. Since this continues to be an issue, I think it would be helpful to decide and include it in WP:MOSCHEM.
For organic compounds, molecular formulas in all databases and catalogs, both electronic and print, use the Hill system. Wikipedia should do the same. It is clear from former discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2005, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2008, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2009, that for organic compounds editors here prefer the Hill system and that is why the chembox uses it. For organic compounds, it doesn't make any sense at all for Wikipedia to use anything else. For inorganic or organometallic compounds, there doesn't seem to be clear consensus. I suggest using the Hill system autogenerated by the chembox for all organic compounds, and if there is a different system that is preferred for certain other compounds, the "Formula =" can be used in its place. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 11:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Dipotassium hexafluoronickel currently redirects to Potassium hexafluoronickelate(IV), but a user has nominated it for deletion at Redirects for discussion with the rationale "obviously wrong". This is a discussion that would particularly benefit from knowledgeable input, hence this message. Your comments would be appreciated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 April 5#Dipotassium hexafluoronickel. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:HighBeam describes a limited opportunity for Wikipedia editors to have access to
HighBeam Research.
—
Wavelength (
talk) 17:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Should File:Hemicellulose.png be inserted into the article Hemicellulose? Or do we have a better alternative as an example of a possible structure of hemicellulose? -- Leyo 13:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Songriter en ( talk · contribs) adds commercial sections based on the same website. Please comment. Is this a systematic advert? Should the edits be reverted, or rewritten? If yes, how (feedback to Songriter en). Materialscientist ( talk) 23:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
A quote from: Van Noorden, Richard (2012), "Chemistry's web of data expands", Nature, 483: 524, doi: 10.1038/483524a
In a project presented at the ACS meeting in San Diego, Williams and his colleagues showed how five large online databases disagreed on the structures of 150 top-selling drugs: the best got 99% of structures correct, whereas the worst managed only 76%. In fact, notes Williams, Wikipedia proved the most reliable source of structural information in that experiment — mostly because of an effort to clean up the site’s 13,000 pages about chemicals
Aa77zz ( talk) 12:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Is for isohexane as an alternative name really a citation needed? BTW: Commons:Category:Isohexane also contains other branched hexanes. -- Leyo 11:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
We now have an article on phosphorus pentaiodide. I always thought that his stuff does not exist, and the second edition of Greenwood and Earnshaw, sort of the bible in this area, says "The pentaiodide does not exist (except perhaps as PI3.I2, but certainly not as PI4+I- as originally claimed [ref to Feshchenko et al.)" The article cites a Chinese source and the Greenwood and Earnshaw book I mentioned. One recourse - we find that there is little evidence for it and say so in the article, which we retain as another interesting "non-existent compound." Thoughts? -- Smokefoot ( talk) 23:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone please explain why chembox has a parameter exact mass and what is its purpose? I think it means molecular mass for the most abundant isotope combination (e.g. 2*(H-1) + O-16 for water), that this notion comes from mass spectrometry, and that it is misleading for a general reader, especially given the meager explanation in exact mass. Good example would be bromides (say, hydrogen bromide); bromine is composed of nearly 50% of Br-79 and Br-81 each, making a difference of 2 in "exact mass". I suggest disabling this parameter. Materialscientist ( talk) 05:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the reminder. I have just posted a notice at Wikipedia talk:Chemical infobox#Exact mass - proposal to remove from template. If there are no strong objections there within a week or so, I think we can go ahead and remove Exact mass. However this will be have to done by someone who is an administrator (not me) since the template is protected. Dirac66 ( talk) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please look at my quandary on Talk:Thallium sulfate and maybe suggest an encyclopedic way out of it. Cheers, Bjenks ( talk) 16:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Are User:Mbcww's contributions helpful? I can't tell whether they are adding useful information, or just spamming links to this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.189.211 ( talk) 19:16, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out. I've blocked that user for spamming. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 21:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Why is an acid when it has oh attachments to the tellurium? Dan653 ( talk) 18:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The Requested Move discussion at Talk:Marinobufagenin needs the attention of experts from this project. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 15:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Turns out that the trouble with long names is not limited to old browsers (such as SeaMonkey 1.1), but also new ones (Firefox 12). The article section does not explain why long names are required, only that they should be adhered to. This should be fixed.
For example, I've seen several discussions refer to searchability and completeness, so that it would be hassle-free to copy these names without later having to encounter characters that should not belong to an adhering name — like
soft hyphens that were added for wrapping so a chembox would not be around 1000 (one thousand) pixels wide. (One of the troubling pages is
Oxytocin.) And then I discovered InChI... -
Mardus (
talk) 05:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Do you mind rephrasing your question? The names are long because ... they are long? They are mechanically constructed according to nomenclature rules. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 06:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed that some pages use vdW images to represent molecules whereas other pages use ball-and-stick type images. I was just wondering if it would be better to stick with one or the other, just for the sake of consistency? Or maybe we should include both types for every article. -- FlamingCobra ( talk) 16:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Hydraulic fracturing article's fracturing fluids section includes several link to cellulose and guar derivatives, some of them are being red links. I wonder if members of this wikiproject could help with checking these links and maybe create relevant stubs or redirect to relevant existing articles. Also, the fracturing fluids section and chemicals section of that article needs assistance with cleaning up. Thank you. Beagel ( talk) 19:06, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I have created this category, and started a bio for Pekka Pyykkö. - DePiep ( talk) 16:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I have worked on the Pyykkö model template. Maybe someone wants to take a look. First of all, the technicalities should be right. After that, layout suggestions are welcome. It is used:
I have made a proposal at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Category:Chemistry disambiguation pages and Category:Molecular formula disambiguation pages that all pages in Category:Chemistry disambiguation pages and Category:Molecular formula disambiguation pages be changed to set index pages, to more accurately reflect the relatedness of the articles listed on those pages. Please note that this change, if implemented, will not affect the substance of any of these pages, but will only entail switching the existing {{Chemistry disambiguation}} and {{MolFormDisambig}} tags for {{Chemistry Index}} and {{MolFormIndex}} tags to be created, modeled on the existing tags. bd2412 T 20:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Is being discussed here. Materialscientist ( talk) 04:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
There have been quite a few new articles created by Alvaro Filbert ( talk · contribs). I found errors in some of the articles he created and some errors in edits he made to existing articles. Also Democracy112 ( talk · contribs) recently created a few new chemistry articles and they contained blatant errors as well. So it might be helpful for another chemist or two have to a look at the contributions from these two editors to make sure there aren't more errors. Thanks. ChemNerd ( talk) 12:12, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
More the last couple of days. These need review. Are any of these notable? I have asked Alvaro Filbert to stop. ChemNerd ( talk) 18:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
1,1,1,2,2,3,3-Heptachloropropane
1,1,2,2,3,3-Hexachloropropane
Hexachloropropene
Pentachloroethane
Methylsilane
Borolane
Thiosilane
Iodosilane
Bromosilane
Fluorosilane
Silicon_monosulfide
(found in interstellar space)
Heptasilane
Hexasilane
Pentasilane(derivatives exist, as also Bicyclo[1.1.1]pentasilane)
Tetrasilane
Arsenic_diiodide
Xenon_monofluoride
[6]
Xenon_monochloride
(but article is wrong)
Gold_triiodide(unstable looks non-notable)
[7]
Uranium_diselenide
Uranium_phosphate
Uranium_monophosphide
Titanium_triiodide
Platinum_disulfide
Tetrauranium_octadecafluoride
Diuranium_pentoxide
Uranium_pentaiodide
Uranium_monobromide
Uranium_monosulfide
Uranium_disulfide
Uranium_disilicide
Uranium_tetrabromide
Uranium_hexachloride
Uranium_tetraiodide
Uranium_triiodide
Uranium_pentabromide
Uranium_pentachloride
Uranium_trifluoride
1,1,2,4-Tetrachlorobutene
2,3,4-Trichlorobutene
Isobutyl chloride
2-Chlorobutane
1,1,3-Trichloropropene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloropropane
1,3-Dichloropropane
The image in Figure 9 is the same as in Figure 8. I guess this is an error. Can someone help? -- Leyo 16:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Several OrganicBox templates have been nominated for deletion, see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_June_21#Template:OrganicBox_tautomers -- 70.49.127.65 ( talk) 04:32, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
It is the first time I see an article about a chemical (here: herbicide) with such a kind of infobox. Are there more such cases? -- Leyo 17:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Seeing that Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Elements coloring scheme didn't have colours for the trans-copernicium elements, I made up some colours for them. Of course they won't be used much, but since even the transactinides had colours, I figured it would be OK. Hopefully they look good and don't clash with any other colours there. :-) Double sharp ( talk) 12:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
There was not an article for this compound, so I recently created one. I've never created an article - much less one about a chemical - so I'd appreciate it if someone with more experience looked it over. Particularly, I'm not sure how the content that goes into chemboxes is verified; all the data I used for this particular article was taken directly from journal articles or MSDS sheets, but I'm not sure what the procedure is for getting the verified check-mark. Also, I'm not sure if the chemical structures - particularly the 3D and VDW models - are up to snuff. They look fine to me, but are not exactly like those found in most other Wiki articles. Ckalnmals ( talk) 16:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Again, thanks for the feedback. In regards to Ben's comment, Sigma doesn't sell it - SCBT and TCI do, though it isn't cheap. Your suggestion about the secondary source is duly noted, though it looks like Smokefoot found one - thanks! It also has melting/boiling point information, which isn't in the chembox currently. I will incorporate the source, as well as the new information, into the article.
In regards to notability, you're probably correct. This is certainly not a common reagent, though it has seen some use in natural product syntheses as of late - haouamines A and B come to mind. Perhaps one of the reasons it's not common, however, is that its utility as an oxidant was only recently reported. I did a SciFinder search and while I saw the Russian synthesis from the 1970s, the first reference where it was used as a reactant was from 1991, and its use as an oxidant wasn't reported until 2000 (DOI:10.1246/cl.2000.1072). Moving the article to sulfinimidoyl chloride is certainly a worthwhile idea, though it would need some additional work. Truth be told, the main reason I wrote the article was because I too thought it was a neat reagent. I stumbled across it in a natural product synthesis, and thought it would be worth sharing via Wikipedia. Again, thanks for all the constructive criticism. Ckalnmals ( talk) 02:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, would someone with a degree in pharmacology/chemistry, please review the following article for accuracy: Bath salts (drug) any corrections with citations would be appreciated. Thank you. JunoBeach ( talk) 10:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Everything is in the title! Before, the diagram in the article
C3H4O gave CAS number
75-56-9 for this compound but in fact, it corresponds to
propylene oxide. I found on the
Japan chemical substance dictionary web service another one,
2835-41-8 but I have a big doubt when I see what PubChem returns with this CAS number. Could someone help me confirm this CAS or find the true CAS number of 2-methyloxirene? --
Titou (
talk) 18:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi:
Wondered if I could get help from someone to make a couple illos, both for the Fluorine article.
2. sketch of fluorine piping diagram
Please, I will be your Wikifriend, if you help! :)
TCO ( talk) 23:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
This article has been proposed for Featured article reassessment. Anyone is welcome to improve the article. JZ CL 21:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
We once had a list of altenative names in PMDTA, why were these removed? Do we really need to verify various names for EDTA with citations? IMHO, many edits made on the ChemBoxes are unhelpful. Cant we discuss these edits, which often strike me as obsessive and even wacky? -- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:32, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
OK, my extended take on this regarding data in the chemboxes (specifically names of compounds):
Some names get special attention in an article (I am thinking of names like 'maleic acid', 'quinone') - which have a distinct reason for being named that way, and there are often suitable references for that - the chembox does not need to duplicate those references (though it does not hurt either).
Regarding MSDS, ChemSpider, CommonChemistry, whatever - those are not suitable references for the existence of a name - many of these databases contain typo's, local names that are totally not common and notable by themselves, etc. etc. The only thing that these databases are suitable proper references for is their own identifier. They however link you to a wealth of information, often each database contains rather unique information (especially on the not-too-common chemicals), and a lot of data which is way out of scope of Wikipedia (some link to collections of reported boiling points of a chemical, which is way out of our scope). Which is exactly why we link to them. If all of them use 'THF' as an abbreviation for 'tetrahydrofuran', then yes, that is likely a real abbreviation of it, but please go by my first point up, not by them. These database have a great risk of massive creep - I see sometimes articles with large (huge) numbers of synonyms, abbreviations, or trade names - way excessive and most of them obscure (and the obscure ones unreferenced). Yes, your shampoo bottle contains 'aqua', and that is probably reflected in ChemSpider, but that is not a suitable place to reference that to.
I hope I have covered my thoughts about this for the moment. I think that my first point up here pretty much makes the reference-request on EDTA useless, for PMDTA it becomes a bit more obscure, but removing the full name from the chembox (un-edit-summarized, but likely because it contained a citation-needed tag for months) is certainly not helpful - I am sure that a reference CAN be found for that (actually, it is following my first point - google scholar search: if a reference says "The tridentate ligand N,N,N',"',N-pentamethyldi- ethylenetriamine (PMDTA) is uniquely suited for the purpose" then it pretty much is a commonly used name/abbreviation, and does not need a reference, especially since more references use similar words), so removing it because it was tagged and no-one bothered to put it there is not the way forward. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 06:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
our readers. Please help us help you-- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC).
See Wikipedia talk:No original research#IUPAC names for chemicals, especially for drugs -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 11:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:ANI#Chembox_edits_by_User:Plasmic_Physics. Materialscientist ( talk) 12:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Have the problem edits been removed? The ANI report was archived with no action taken (archive is here). However, DGG made it very clear that he would take whatever action was required to resolve the matter, and he requested to be informed of anything that might need his attention. Johnuniq ( talk) 12:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
A user is insisting on inserting a chembox for aqua regia, when we've decided not to do that for mixtures. The suggested chembox also contains misinformation, such as a SMILES, molecular formula, molar mass, solubility, etc. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Note, while hydrogen chloride and hydrogen nitrate are essential ingredients, aqua regia is a complex system of various components produced by their reaction. The suggested chembox is an oversimplification of this dynamic system. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Again the problem here is the black-or-white approach (which is exemplified by the remark from Plasmic Physics "It may set a precedent, are we going to have chemboxes for sun screen then? Plasmic Physics ( talk) 13:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)" - Certain things are certainly not white, but it is certainly worth to think about things that are grey, and not just throw them away as 'they are not white'. Plasmic Physics, as I say below, I would suggest that you steer well away from chemboxes and discussions about them for at least 3-6 months. Let it properly cool down, I am afraid you have upset too many editors. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
So, lets take care of the problems one at a time.
Feel free to create subheaders for other problems, these are the only ones that most people have a problem with. I need users to not just propose solutions, but also agree on them. Please stay on topic, I do not add names/abbreviations, except for systematic names of course.
Here is a deal: work with me to answer these problems, and I will repair the "damage" by restoring the deleted names.
Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Plasmic Physics, you have now formally been banned to edit chemboxes in articles, leaving it to us to repair the damage that many editors think that you have inflicted on the chemboxes. I would really suggest that you leave all those subjects regarding chemboxes alone for at least 3-6 months (including here), and perform some other editing. Your points are real, but the way you went around Wikipedia editing chemboxes was upsetting way too many editors (and the edits like the unexplained reverting of the densities were very bitey and may have resulted in editors walking away), and with discussions like this you run the risk you further inflame the situation. Please, please, let it cool down properly. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 204:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
I have proposed merging the two articles N-Methyl-D-aspartic acid and N-Methyl-DL-aspartic acid. One is about the single enantiomer and the other is about the racemate. If anyone would like to contribute to the discussion, it is here: Talk:N-Methyl-D-aspartic_acid#Merge. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 12:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Does it make sense to describe the deprotonated form? -- Leyo 16:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
No. It is sold in the acid form or as a magnesium or ammonium salt (see Aldrich) http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/search?interface=All&term=8-Anilino-1-naphthalenesulfonic+acid&lang=en®ion=US&focus=product&N=0+220003048+219853269+219853286&mode=mode%20matchpartialmax). If we are describing the acid form we ought to show it that way. JSR ( talk) 16:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Picture in German wiki shows a light-blue colour instead white on english version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.60.94 ( talk) 21:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone, especially someone with administrative status, might talk to user:Xiangzhuang-pg. The edits are clumsy and often oriented toward a company. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I propose that we have a C-class assessment option for articles in this project. The text from this page states:
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.
Many of our start class articles could be upgraded to C Class. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 04:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Some discussion over here Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_20#Template:R-phrase, and I think the chemists should be adequately represented. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 18:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think the skull and crossbones graphic should be removed from the toxicity sections of articles such as Arsenic, Chlorine and Thallium ( full list of usage in article space) since it doesn't increase the reader's understanding of the subject matter. (Or are we legally required to include them?) May I get a second opinion? Thanks. wctaiwan ( talk) 13:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Redirects Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly and Aluminium zirconium trichlorohydrex gly, both of which currently target Aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly have been nominated at RfD with the rationale "Trichlorohydrex != tetrachlorohydrex". As the target page is tagged for this WikiProject your comments would be particularly welcome in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 September 15#Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Chemicals for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 05:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I made a request at Template talk:Chembox CASNo to change our CAS database provider away from CommonChemistry.org. I found much better website that has more complete information (without advertising):
CommonChemistry.org is essentially a crippleware advert for their "member's only" SciFinder. [8] - Stillwaterising ( talk) 20:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
A well intentioned but I think ill-advised edit was made this morning (at least my morning) where a semi-exhaustive list of binary fluorides was added to Fluoride. I reverted it in an effort to get some sort of consensus on this venture. I can understand the motivation in part but think nonetheless that it is a bad idea.
One possible compromise would be that we aim for consensus on a few - 3-5 key materials and invite those that want to see an exhaustive list to delve into categories. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I note the article about sodium ascorbate lists solubility in water (also alcohol). After reading that, I wondered about the solubility of calcium ascorbate in water. That data doesn't seem listed there! My particular interest was their relative solubilities. I wanted to bring this difference to the attention of chemists. Dare I check the potassium ascorbate page? Hmm. Gzuufy ( talk) 18:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I need some help to flesh out the article and to iron out all the creases. So far, I've distinguished between two usages of the term scandium hydride. I want to avoid making the page just a list of facts, and include some discussion. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 13:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
"The h- sc (Hydrogen- Scandium) system" by F. D. Manchester and J. M. Pitre. They discuss the material in the context of the lanthanide hydrides, which do appear to be prominent materials. Good luck, -- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:43, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
An IP has been changing SMILES in drug/chemboxes; as far as I see, the main changes are from aromatic atoms (lowercase) to double bonds, eg. here. Could someone have a look at these changes? (I'm sorry to say I haven't got enough time at the moment.) Thanks, ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 11:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
This article is in desperate need of attention from editors with good biological and chemical backgrounds, and prioritization of such may be hindered by its assignment of a "low" importance tag by this Project team.
I would note that a google search of the term gives ≈2,600,000 results, where the wikipedia article is the first. The Project team might compare the interest in this subject—which includes the health-related "hot" topics of the antioxidant properties of plant-derived polyphenols, e.g., from grapes used in red wine manufacture, various bramble polyphenol such as raspberry ellagitannins—with other higher priority articles, to see if this is a fair assessment of outside interest. Cheers. Leprof 7272 ( talk) 05:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
The Algarot article mixes up things so I wanted to move it or rename it. Algarot is most likely either a mixture of SbOCl with Sb4O5Cl2 or pure Sb4O5Cl2. So the article might be best be put as chapter into an article about antimonyoxychlorides.
Any suggestions before I start to move things around?-- Stone ( talk) 13:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at Talk:Mephedrone#Racemate.3F? User:Jü pointed out a while ago that the illustrations in the chembox are incorrect and got round to changing them this week but has been reverted. I'm not sure which is correct and hopefully someone here knows what's best! SmartSE ( talk) 12:52, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I know there have been quite a few folks making skeletal structure SVGs on request, but I'm not certain who is currently active and doing so. I also know that I'm awful at this. I created this image of the structure of calostomal (and/or its methyl ester) for my current article project, but it is clearly of terrible quality. If someone with some spare time would be willing to redraw that in a way that's presentable, I'd be especially grateful! Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 21:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't do SVGs, sorry. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 22:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry/Structure drawing is a good manual.-- Stone ( talk) 23:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
This AFD could use the input of a couple more chemists. ChemNerd ( talk) 13:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
P.G.Antolinos ( talk · contribs) moved phosphine to phosphane earlier today. I'm not sure whether this is correct or not. Could someone take a look? Thanks! SmartSE ( talk) 17:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you guys help with Special:Contributions/Skuhl2, please? -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 21:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/reactorgo/projects
-- Stone ( talk) 23:24, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone who raised concerns. I appreciate the interest and desire to ensure these articles have academic integrity and meet Wikipedia's standards. It has always been my intention these articles be a positive contribution to the Wikipedia community. This project is a voluntary honors project. When designing this project, we sought to provide detailed instructions and policy documentation to make sure the students had adequate opportunity to successfully complete drafting a quality Wikipedia article. As an honors Chemistry project we gave the students (working in peer groups) responsibility to complete their proposed final drafts at a level worthy of finial publication to Wikipedia. However, it has always been our intention these articles be reviewed prior to any submission for publication. Along with the review process, I have listed below the other steps we took to try to make this project a success. Please take a look at what our process has been. If you can recommend any improvements or changes to the the process to better meet Wikipedia's standards, please let us know. It would be very helpful.
We required the projects to be worked on entirely in the sandbox where we felt there would be no harm to Wikipedia or add additional work to other editors as the students learned to edit and gather information for their articles. (Part of the initiative was for the students to learn how they might contribute future articles, not just for this assignment.)
Our continued goal is the improvement and expansion of Wikipedia and exposing students to the Wikipedia process to hopefully encourage them to become continuing contributors to the Wikipedia project as a whole. Again, I appreciate your feedback and welcome any suggestions on this accounts talk page. Reactuiuc ( talk) 04:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Having cleaned up a few of these articles, I have a general comments:
With all that said, I felt that terrible image copyright violations notwithstanding, diamantane, User:Mkleinjan/sandbox and User:Aradi7/sandbox were quite nice.
Anyway, my suggestions for you are:
I hope this helps. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 15:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
All (most) of your comments and suggestions are appreciated. My TA's and I are discussing how to best proceed from this point. You all have extensive experience in this forum and we will weight all of our decisions with that in mind. I am somewhat embarrassed that some of our students published articles that were awful. It was our intent that ALL articles would stay in the sandbox until either I, or one of the TA's, review the article and approve the move. We are discussing ways in which to control this much better in the future. We are just now reviewing the pages with grades in mind. It is obvious to me that we will have to be a larger presence in the process. This is a fantastic learning experience for the students, and as we learn and grow; so will the quality of the output for the benefit of all. TurfNakrion ( talk) 19:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Group 1 Lithium Cyanide, Cyanuric Triazide, Barium Metaphosphate
Group 2 copper oxalate, tungsten IV fluoride, and magnesium oxalate
Group 3 Glaucarubin , Salsoline, Azapiracid, 2-Aminofluorene, Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane, Ethiofencarb
Group 4- 4-Nitrobenzamide and diethyl succinate and 3-Aminobenzamide
Group 5 Nitropentaamminecobalt (III) chloride and 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene and N,N-Dimethyl-4-iodoaniline
Group 6 Lythranidine, Hydrocinnamic Acid, and Vobasan
Group 7 - Spiropyran , Choloropentaaminecobalt (III) Chloride, Bromopentaaminecobalt (III) Bromide, Methylmagnesium Bromide
Group 8 - allylcyclopentane, Bromoacetyl bromide, Benzestrol
Group 9- 1,2,4-Trimethylcyclohexane, Lead (II) Oxalate, 4-Fluorobenzoic acid
Group 10- Cysmethynil, Crufomate, and Mucobromic Acid
Group 11 - Phenylethanolamine, Allyl cyanide, Acetyl cyanide
Group 12 - Niobium (V) Ethoxide, Tantalum (V) Ethoxide, Monobutyltin Trichloride
Group 13- barium cyanide, beryillium sulfide, cadmium chromate, Lithium Chromate
Group 14 - methoxymethyl fluoride, User:Ajchancellor/sandbox, (1R,3R)-1,2,3-trimethylcyclopentane
Group 15 - L-β-Homoleucine hydrochloride, Homoarginine
Group 18 - Calcium perchlorate , Calcium nitrite , 2-Bromobutyric acid
Group 19 - Nitroethylene, Acetaldoxime, diamantane, N-Hydroxypiperidine
Group 20 - Acetylcholine bromide, Glycine Hydrochloride, Anpirtoline Hydrochloride, 2,3,5-trimethyl pyrazine
Group 21 - Sodium stannate, bromine azide, sodium tetrasulfide
Group 22 - Nickel selenide, Strontium oxalate, Manganese (II) phosphate
Group 23 -
Nickle(II) Sulfide,
propargyl bromide,
ammonium carbamate, [
|hydroxycitronellal]
Group 24 - Rifalazil, 2'-fucosyllactose, 2-Butenoic Acid, 1,4-Bis(diphenylphosphino)butane
Group 25 - Dodecene, Tetramethylammonium Perchlorate, Quintozene, Barium hexafluorosilicate, Potassium ethoxide
Group 26- Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate, 2-Butynediamide (Cellocidin), Glyceryl Hydroxystearate , Aspergillic Acid, Visnagin, Aminocarb
Group 28-Safrole, Anthranilic Acid, and phosphorus pentachloride
Group 29- ethyl bromodifluoroacetate Ethyl Bromodifluoroacetate[ [10]] Pentafluorobenzoic acid[ [11]] 5-Bromouridine
? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.80.19 ( talk) 15:42, 2 December 2012 (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 2005 | ← | Archive 2010 | Archive 2011 | Archive 2012 |
are no more available, see http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/index2.html. Looks like a lot of work to do... Nice weekend, -- FK1954 ( talk) 19:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:Neon compounds has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Double sharp (
talk) 12:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
I propose that the MeltingPt and BoilingPt fields be altered — that the "−" exchanged for the "–" in cases where a range is displayed. An example: "− # –−%" instead of "− # −−%". Plasmic Physics ( talk) 08:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Ethane. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:45, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I've added a section to the "dopaminergic" template; a new section, but I require someone to help me by making the individual articles linked. A good start would be the re-drawing of free-license versions of these compounds/molecules and uploading them: “Agonist” and “Antagonist” Allosteric Modulators of Amphetamine-Induced Dopamine Release. I have recently re-located and do not have access to my chem-draw software, but this would be an important addition to the dopaminergic articles here in Wikipedia's contribution to molecular biology Nagelfar ( talk) 02:00, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Psilocybin was recently promoted to a FA. Right now it has a red X by the CAS number. Could someone make it a green check mark instead? Thanks. Jesanj ( talk) 01:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Organic table information & Inorganic table information. Since you had some involvement with the Organic table information Inorganic table information redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 76.65.128.132 ( talk) 05:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
This might be useful:
1 H |
2 He | ||||||||||||||||
3 Li |
4 Be |
5 B |
6 C |
7 N |
8 O |
9 F |
10 Ne | ||||||||||
11 Na |
12 Mg |
13 Al |
14 Si |
15 P |
16 S |
17 Cl |
18 Ar | ||||||||||
19 K |
20 Ca |
21 Sc |
22 Ti |
23 V |
24 Cr |
25 Mn |
26 Fe |
27 Co |
28 Ni |
29 Cu |
30 Zn |
31 Ga |
32 Ge |
33 As |
34 Se |
35 Br |
36 Kr |
37 Rb |
38 Sr |
39 Y |
40 Zr |
41 Nb |
42 Mo |
43 Tc |
44 Ru |
45 Rh |
46 Pd |
47 Ag |
48 Cd |
49 In |
50 Sn |
51 Sb |
52 Te |
53 I |
54 Xe |
55 Cs |
56 Ba |
* | 72 Hf |
73 Ta |
74 W |
75 Re |
76 Os |
77 Ir |
78 Pt |
79 Au |
80 Hg |
81 Tl |
82 Pb |
83 Bi |
84 Po |
85 At |
86 Rn |
87 Fr |
88 Ra |
** | 104 Rf |
105 Db |
106 Sg |
107 Bh |
108 Hs |
109 Mt |
110 Ds |
111 Rg |
112 Cn |
113 Uut |
114 Fl |
115 Uup |
116 Lv |
117 Uus |
118 Uuo |
* | 57 La |
58 Ce |
59 Pr |
60 Nd |
61 Pm |
62 Sm |
63 Eu |
64 Gd |
65 Tb |
66 Dy |
67 Ho |
68 Er |
69 Tm |
70 Yb |
71 Lu |
** | 89 Ac |
90 Th |
91 Pa |
92 U |
93 Np |
94 Pu |
95 Am |
96 Cm |
97 Bk |
98 Cf |
99 Es |
100 Fm |
101 Md |
102 No |
103 Lr |
Double sharp ( talk) 09:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Looking around for info about drugs for an article I'm writing, I've noticed that we have a lot of articles along the lines of Chemical X (data page). There are 171 pages in Category:Chemical data pages, most of which are separate articles. Personally, I think these don't belong as separate articles. Would anyone object if these were moved to a subpage of the chemical's article's talk page, so Morphine (data page) would be moved to Talk:Morphine/Data page? Given that this involves ~170 pages, I thought I'd bring it here for a discussion about this instead of being bold. Quasi human | Talk 22:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I am finding myself starting a lot of stubs on new chemicals or classes of chemicals (well notable, too). They will always be low view, but are binary compounds and additive to the pedia. I guess maybe DYKing them could be a good objective. That or just stubbing, not sure. DYK has gotten so hard and scary. That said, it pushes me to do more than a cat, a ref, and a sentence.
I guess just looking to get any insights on how to be more efficient.
Will skim the info here. I guess for now, just plan to do cut and paste ffrom existing article (into sandbox), modify to make new one, method of article generation. Just looking for insights to make this easier, less work.
TCO ( talk) 02:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Try searching the German Wikipedia. They might have the equivalent article, and you can translate it as a starting point. You can let us here know of the new articles, and usually those who can will help expand them. Chemspider is good, but do be careful about their "names" list. Journal references are always nice, but if they are in textbooks that's even better since textbooks put them into context whereas journal articles may not do so. Since you are talking about binary compounds, Greenwood, Norman N.; Earnshaw, Alan (1997). Chemistry of the Elements (2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-08-037941-8. is a nice place to start. Inorg. Synth. may tell you how to make them, which is always desirable for a compound. If economically significant, Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3527306732. might discuss the industrial route. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 16:02, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
I just looked at the worklist and it says it is historical only. Think some of the discussion on this page linking to it should change. Feel free to revert of course. TCO ( talk) 04:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. The Style Guide is no longer an Activity in Progress, is it? The box on the upper right corner indicates that Wikipedia:CHEMMOS is the official style guide but the subsection in the body text of the project article says otherwise. If anybody cares to verify that this is no longer an Activity in Progress, I'll make the change. USEPA James ( talk) 21:21, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
For anyone that is interested, there is a discussion about renaming Category:Natural_opium_alkaloids to Category:Opium_alkaloids here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_15#Category:Natural_opium_alkaloids. ChemNerd ( talk) 21:50, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated for deletion the new chemistry article Tripeptide-37. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripeptide-37. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 13:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a note on well-intentioned but potentially problematic activity by user:NotWith who is carefully listing the phenols detected in some foodstuffs. See [ [1]]. One can reasonably assume that all foods contain thousands of organic compounds, and many major organic compounds are found in thousands or more foods. These edits could go on forever.
I question the value of these additions unless there is something notable about the occurrence of a particular organic compound (like HCN in peach pits, or certain characteristic compounds that powerfully influence flavors or odors or nutrition). Comments from others?-- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:36, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Is the structure shown in Zinc titanate correct? IMHO a crystal structure would be needed for this compound that is in the solid state at room temperature. -- Leyo 19:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
The article Hydrochloric acid (data page) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Plasmic Physics (
talk) 08:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
How do you then suppose we fill fields like bond length? The page then becomes a discriminatory list of information. This particular page has not been used since it was created over 5 years ago. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 08:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
There is never a need for sarcasm in a serious situation. Those edits did not fill any entry fields, in fact the page has shrunken since its creation. Redirecting attention, by no means removes the issue. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
OK, that's fine. (It seems odd not to have it for any other data page.) Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
Chembox}}
allows to autogenerate chemical formula by specifying elements (C = 1, H = 2, etc.). This is convenient (mass is auto-calculated and the input is simple) and therefore is used in many articles, but results in weird formulas like Cl3W, etc., because the ordering is alphabetic. This ordering is accepted by suppliers but not scientists. Proposal: change it to the IUPAC system, where the elements are listed in order of their position in the periodic table, read from bottom to top, left to right, and hydrogen between groups 15 and 16. Beetstra suggested to bring this here. Please comment/vote.
Materialscientist (
talk) 07:41, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm reviving this older discussion. Since this continues to be an issue, I think it would be helpful to decide and include it in WP:MOSCHEM.
For organic compounds, molecular formulas in all databases and catalogs, both electronic and print, use the Hill system. Wikipedia should do the same. It is clear from former discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2005, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2008, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2009, that for organic compounds editors here prefer the Hill system and that is why the chembox uses it. For organic compounds, it doesn't make any sense at all for Wikipedia to use anything else. For inorganic or organometallic compounds, there doesn't seem to be clear consensus. I suggest using the Hill system autogenerated by the chembox for all organic compounds, and if there is a different system that is preferred for certain other compounds, the "Formula =" can be used in its place. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 11:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Dipotassium hexafluoronickel currently redirects to Potassium hexafluoronickelate(IV), but a user has nominated it for deletion at Redirects for discussion with the rationale "obviously wrong". This is a discussion that would particularly benefit from knowledgeable input, hence this message. Your comments would be appreciated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 April 5#Dipotassium hexafluoronickel. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:HighBeam describes a limited opportunity for Wikipedia editors to have access to
HighBeam Research.
—
Wavelength (
talk) 17:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Should File:Hemicellulose.png be inserted into the article Hemicellulose? Or do we have a better alternative as an example of a possible structure of hemicellulose? -- Leyo 13:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Songriter en ( talk · contribs) adds commercial sections based on the same website. Please comment. Is this a systematic advert? Should the edits be reverted, or rewritten? If yes, how (feedback to Songriter en). Materialscientist ( talk) 23:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
A quote from: Van Noorden, Richard (2012), "Chemistry's web of data expands", Nature, 483: 524, doi: 10.1038/483524a
In a project presented at the ACS meeting in San Diego, Williams and his colleagues showed how five large online databases disagreed on the structures of 150 top-selling drugs: the best got 99% of structures correct, whereas the worst managed only 76%. In fact, notes Williams, Wikipedia proved the most reliable source of structural information in that experiment — mostly because of an effort to clean up the site’s 13,000 pages about chemicals
Aa77zz ( talk) 12:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Is for isohexane as an alternative name really a citation needed? BTW: Commons:Category:Isohexane also contains other branched hexanes. -- Leyo 11:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
We now have an article on phosphorus pentaiodide. I always thought that his stuff does not exist, and the second edition of Greenwood and Earnshaw, sort of the bible in this area, says "The pentaiodide does not exist (except perhaps as PI3.I2, but certainly not as PI4+I- as originally claimed [ref to Feshchenko et al.)" The article cites a Chinese source and the Greenwood and Earnshaw book I mentioned. One recourse - we find that there is little evidence for it and say so in the article, which we retain as another interesting "non-existent compound." Thoughts? -- Smokefoot ( talk) 23:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Could someone please explain why chembox has a parameter exact mass and what is its purpose? I think it means molecular mass for the most abundant isotope combination (e.g. 2*(H-1) + O-16 for water), that this notion comes from mass spectrometry, and that it is misleading for a general reader, especially given the meager explanation in exact mass. Good example would be bromides (say, hydrogen bromide); bromine is composed of nearly 50% of Br-79 and Br-81 each, making a difference of 2 in "exact mass". I suggest disabling this parameter. Materialscientist ( talk) 05:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the reminder. I have just posted a notice at Wikipedia talk:Chemical infobox#Exact mass - proposal to remove from template. If there are no strong objections there within a week or so, I think we can go ahead and remove Exact mass. However this will be have to done by someone who is an administrator (not me) since the template is protected. Dirac66 ( talk) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please look at my quandary on Talk:Thallium sulfate and maybe suggest an encyclopedic way out of it. Cheers, Bjenks ( talk) 16:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Are User:Mbcww's contributions helpful? I can't tell whether they are adding useful information, or just spamming links to this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.189.211 ( talk) 19:16, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out. I've blocked that user for spamming. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 21:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Why is an acid when it has oh attachments to the tellurium? Dan653 ( talk) 18:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The Requested Move discussion at Talk:Marinobufagenin needs the attention of experts from this project. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 15:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Turns out that the trouble with long names is not limited to old browsers (such as SeaMonkey 1.1), but also new ones (Firefox 12). The article section does not explain why long names are required, only that they should be adhered to. This should be fixed.
For example, I've seen several discussions refer to searchability and completeness, so that it would be hassle-free to copy these names without later having to encounter characters that should not belong to an adhering name — like
soft hyphens that were added for wrapping so a chembox would not be around 1000 (one thousand) pixels wide. (One of the troubling pages is
Oxytocin.) And then I discovered InChI... -
Mardus (
talk) 05:37, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Do you mind rephrasing your question? The names are long because ... they are long? They are mechanically constructed according to nomenclature rules. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 06:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed that some pages use vdW images to represent molecules whereas other pages use ball-and-stick type images. I was just wondering if it would be better to stick with one or the other, just for the sake of consistency? Or maybe we should include both types for every article. -- FlamingCobra ( talk) 16:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Hydraulic fracturing article's fracturing fluids section includes several link to cellulose and guar derivatives, some of them are being red links. I wonder if members of this wikiproject could help with checking these links and maybe create relevant stubs or redirect to relevant existing articles. Also, the fracturing fluids section and chemicals section of that article needs assistance with cleaning up. Thank you. Beagel ( talk) 19:06, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
I have created this category, and started a bio for Pekka Pyykkö. - DePiep ( talk) 16:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I have worked on the Pyykkö model template. Maybe someone wants to take a look. First of all, the technicalities should be right. After that, layout suggestions are welcome. It is used:
I have made a proposal at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Category:Chemistry disambiguation pages and Category:Molecular formula disambiguation pages that all pages in Category:Chemistry disambiguation pages and Category:Molecular formula disambiguation pages be changed to set index pages, to more accurately reflect the relatedness of the articles listed on those pages. Please note that this change, if implemented, will not affect the substance of any of these pages, but will only entail switching the existing {{Chemistry disambiguation}} and {{MolFormDisambig}} tags for {{Chemistry Index}} and {{MolFormIndex}} tags to be created, modeled on the existing tags. bd2412 T 20:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Is being discussed here. Materialscientist ( talk) 04:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
There have been quite a few new articles created by Alvaro Filbert ( talk · contribs). I found errors in some of the articles he created and some errors in edits he made to existing articles. Also Democracy112 ( talk · contribs) recently created a few new chemistry articles and they contained blatant errors as well. So it might be helpful for another chemist or two have to a look at the contributions from these two editors to make sure there aren't more errors. Thanks. ChemNerd ( talk) 12:12, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
More the last couple of days. These need review. Are any of these notable? I have asked Alvaro Filbert to stop. ChemNerd ( talk) 18:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
1,1,1,2,2,3,3-Heptachloropropane
1,1,2,2,3,3-Hexachloropropane
Hexachloropropene
Pentachloroethane
Methylsilane
Borolane
Thiosilane
Iodosilane
Bromosilane
Fluorosilane
Silicon_monosulfide
(found in interstellar space)
Heptasilane
Hexasilane
Pentasilane(derivatives exist, as also Bicyclo[1.1.1]pentasilane)
Tetrasilane
Arsenic_diiodide
Xenon_monofluoride
[6]
Xenon_monochloride
(but article is wrong)
Gold_triiodide(unstable looks non-notable)
[7]
Uranium_diselenide
Uranium_phosphate
Uranium_monophosphide
Titanium_triiodide
Platinum_disulfide
Tetrauranium_octadecafluoride
Diuranium_pentoxide
Uranium_pentaiodide
Uranium_monobromide
Uranium_monosulfide
Uranium_disulfide
Uranium_disilicide
Uranium_tetrabromide
Uranium_hexachloride
Uranium_tetraiodide
Uranium_triiodide
Uranium_pentabromide
Uranium_pentachloride
Uranium_trifluoride
1,1,2,4-Tetrachlorobutene
2,3,4-Trichlorobutene
Isobutyl chloride
2-Chlorobutane
1,1,3-Trichloropropene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloropropane
1,3-Dichloropropane
The image in Figure 9 is the same as in Figure 8. I guess this is an error. Can someone help? -- Leyo 16:37, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Several OrganicBox templates have been nominated for deletion, see Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_June_21#Template:OrganicBox_tautomers -- 70.49.127.65 ( talk) 04:32, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
It is the first time I see an article about a chemical (here: herbicide) with such a kind of infobox. Are there more such cases? -- Leyo 17:36, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Seeing that Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Elements coloring scheme didn't have colours for the trans-copernicium elements, I made up some colours for them. Of course they won't be used much, but since even the transactinides had colours, I figured it would be OK. Hopefully they look good and don't clash with any other colours there. :-) Double sharp ( talk) 12:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
There was not an article for this compound, so I recently created one. I've never created an article - much less one about a chemical - so I'd appreciate it if someone with more experience looked it over. Particularly, I'm not sure how the content that goes into chemboxes is verified; all the data I used for this particular article was taken directly from journal articles or MSDS sheets, but I'm not sure what the procedure is for getting the verified check-mark. Also, I'm not sure if the chemical structures - particularly the 3D and VDW models - are up to snuff. They look fine to me, but are not exactly like those found in most other Wiki articles. Ckalnmals ( talk) 16:59, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Again, thanks for the feedback. In regards to Ben's comment, Sigma doesn't sell it - SCBT and TCI do, though it isn't cheap. Your suggestion about the secondary source is duly noted, though it looks like Smokefoot found one - thanks! It also has melting/boiling point information, which isn't in the chembox currently. I will incorporate the source, as well as the new information, into the article.
In regards to notability, you're probably correct. This is certainly not a common reagent, though it has seen some use in natural product syntheses as of late - haouamines A and B come to mind. Perhaps one of the reasons it's not common, however, is that its utility as an oxidant was only recently reported. I did a SciFinder search and while I saw the Russian synthesis from the 1970s, the first reference where it was used as a reactant was from 1991, and its use as an oxidant wasn't reported until 2000 (DOI:10.1246/cl.2000.1072). Moving the article to sulfinimidoyl chloride is certainly a worthwhile idea, though it would need some additional work. Truth be told, the main reason I wrote the article was because I too thought it was a neat reagent. I stumbled across it in a natural product synthesis, and thought it would be worth sharing via Wikipedia. Again, thanks for all the constructive criticism. Ckalnmals ( talk) 02:49, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, would someone with a degree in pharmacology/chemistry, please review the following article for accuracy: Bath salts (drug) any corrections with citations would be appreciated. Thank you. JunoBeach ( talk) 10:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Everything is in the title! Before, the diagram in the article
C3H4O gave CAS number
75-56-9 for this compound but in fact, it corresponds to
propylene oxide. I found on the
Japan chemical substance dictionary web service another one,
2835-41-8 but I have a big doubt when I see what PubChem returns with this CAS number. Could someone help me confirm this CAS or find the true CAS number of 2-methyloxirene? --
Titou (
talk) 18:27, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi:
Wondered if I could get help from someone to make a couple illos, both for the Fluorine article.
2. sketch of fluorine piping diagram
Please, I will be your Wikifriend, if you help! :)
TCO ( talk) 23:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
This article has been proposed for Featured article reassessment. Anyone is welcome to improve the article. JZ CL 21:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
We once had a list of altenative names in PMDTA, why were these removed? Do we really need to verify various names for EDTA with citations? IMHO, many edits made on the ChemBoxes are unhelpful. Cant we discuss these edits, which often strike me as obsessive and even wacky? -- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:32, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
OK, my extended take on this regarding data in the chemboxes (specifically names of compounds):
Some names get special attention in an article (I am thinking of names like 'maleic acid', 'quinone') - which have a distinct reason for being named that way, and there are often suitable references for that - the chembox does not need to duplicate those references (though it does not hurt either).
Regarding MSDS, ChemSpider, CommonChemistry, whatever - those are not suitable references for the existence of a name - many of these databases contain typo's, local names that are totally not common and notable by themselves, etc. etc. The only thing that these databases are suitable proper references for is their own identifier. They however link you to a wealth of information, often each database contains rather unique information (especially on the not-too-common chemicals), and a lot of data which is way out of scope of Wikipedia (some link to collections of reported boiling points of a chemical, which is way out of our scope). Which is exactly why we link to them. If all of them use 'THF' as an abbreviation for 'tetrahydrofuran', then yes, that is likely a real abbreviation of it, but please go by my first point up, not by them. These database have a great risk of massive creep - I see sometimes articles with large (huge) numbers of synonyms, abbreviations, or trade names - way excessive and most of them obscure (and the obscure ones unreferenced). Yes, your shampoo bottle contains 'aqua', and that is probably reflected in ChemSpider, but that is not a suitable place to reference that to.
I hope I have covered my thoughts about this for the moment. I think that my first point up here pretty much makes the reference-request on EDTA useless, for PMDTA it becomes a bit more obscure, but removing the full name from the chembox (un-edit-summarized, but likely because it contained a citation-needed tag for months) is certainly not helpful - I am sure that a reference CAN be found for that (actually, it is following my first point - google scholar search: if a reference says "The tridentate ligand N,N,N',"',N-pentamethyldi- ethylenetriamine (PMDTA) is uniquely suited for the purpose" then it pretty much is a commonly used name/abbreviation, and does not need a reference, especially since more references use similar words), so removing it because it was tagged and no-one bothered to put it there is not the way forward. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 06:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
our readers. Please help us help you-- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC).
See Wikipedia talk:No original research#IUPAC names for chemicals, especially for drugs -- ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 11:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:ANI#Chembox_edits_by_User:Plasmic_Physics. Materialscientist ( talk) 12:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Have the problem edits been removed? The ANI report was archived with no action taken (archive is here). However, DGG made it very clear that he would take whatever action was required to resolve the matter, and he requested to be informed of anything that might need his attention. Johnuniq ( talk) 12:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
A user is insisting on inserting a chembox for aqua regia, when we've decided not to do that for mixtures. The suggested chembox also contains misinformation, such as a SMILES, molecular formula, molar mass, solubility, etc. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Note, while hydrogen chloride and hydrogen nitrate are essential ingredients, aqua regia is a complex system of various components produced by their reaction. The suggested chembox is an oversimplification of this dynamic system. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 09:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Again the problem here is the black-or-white approach (which is exemplified by the remark from Plasmic Physics "It may set a precedent, are we going to have chemboxes for sun screen then? Plasmic Physics ( talk) 13:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)" - Certain things are certainly not white, but it is certainly worth to think about things that are grey, and not just throw them away as 'they are not white'. Plasmic Physics, as I say below, I would suggest that you steer well away from chemboxes and discussions about them for at least 3-6 months. Let it properly cool down, I am afraid you have upset too many editors. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
So, lets take care of the problems one at a time.
Feel free to create subheaders for other problems, these are the only ones that most people have a problem with. I need users to not just propose solutions, but also agree on them. Please stay on topic, I do not add names/abbreviations, except for systematic names of course.
Here is a deal: work with me to answer these problems, and I will repair the "damage" by restoring the deleted names.
Plasmic Physics ( talk) 10:25, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Plasmic Physics, you have now formally been banned to edit chemboxes in articles, leaving it to us to repair the damage that many editors think that you have inflicted on the chemboxes. I would really suggest that you leave all those subjects regarding chemboxes alone for at least 3-6 months (including here), and perform some other editing. Your points are real, but the way you went around Wikipedia editing chemboxes was upsetting way too many editors (and the edits like the unexplained reverting of the densities were very bitey and may have resulted in editors walking away), and with discussions like this you run the risk you further inflame the situation. Please, please, let it cool down properly. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 204:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
I have proposed merging the two articles N-Methyl-D-aspartic acid and N-Methyl-DL-aspartic acid. One is about the single enantiomer and the other is about the racemate. If anyone would like to contribute to the discussion, it is here: Talk:N-Methyl-D-aspartic_acid#Merge. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 12:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Does it make sense to describe the deprotonated form? -- Leyo 16:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
No. It is sold in the acid form or as a magnesium or ammonium salt (see Aldrich) http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/search?interface=All&term=8-Anilino-1-naphthalenesulfonic+acid&lang=en®ion=US&focus=product&N=0+220003048+219853269+219853286&mode=mode%20matchpartialmax). If we are describing the acid form we ought to show it that way. JSR ( talk) 16:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Picture in German wiki shows a light-blue colour instead white on english version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.60.94 ( talk) 21:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone, especially someone with administrative status, might talk to user:Xiangzhuang-pg. The edits are clumsy and often oriented toward a company. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 12:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I propose that we have a C-class assessment option for articles in this project. The text from this page states:
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.
Many of our start class articles could be upgraded to C Class. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 04:03, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Some discussion over here Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_20#Template:R-phrase, and I think the chemists should be adequately represented. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 18:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I think the skull and crossbones graphic should be removed from the toxicity sections of articles such as Arsenic, Chlorine and Thallium ( full list of usage in article space) since it doesn't increase the reader's understanding of the subject matter. (Or are we legally required to include them?) May I get a second opinion? Thanks. wctaiwan ( talk) 13:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Redirects Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly and Aluminium zirconium trichlorohydrex gly, both of which currently target Aluminium zirconium tetrachlorohydrex gly have been nominated at RfD with the rationale "Trichlorohydrex != tetrachlorohydrex". As the target page is tagged for this WikiProject your comments would be particularly welcome in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 September 15#Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Chemicals for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. - Mabeenot ( talk) 05:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I made a request at Template talk:Chembox CASNo to change our CAS database provider away from CommonChemistry.org. I found much better website that has more complete information (without advertising):
CommonChemistry.org is essentially a crippleware advert for their "member's only" SciFinder. [8] - Stillwaterising ( talk) 20:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
A well intentioned but I think ill-advised edit was made this morning (at least my morning) where a semi-exhaustive list of binary fluorides was added to Fluoride. I reverted it in an effort to get some sort of consensus on this venture. I can understand the motivation in part but think nonetheless that it is a bad idea.
One possible compromise would be that we aim for consensus on a few - 3-5 key materials and invite those that want to see an exhaustive list to delve into categories. -- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I note the article about sodium ascorbate lists solubility in water (also alcohol). After reading that, I wondered about the solubility of calcium ascorbate in water. That data doesn't seem listed there! My particular interest was their relative solubilities. I wanted to bring this difference to the attention of chemists. Dare I check the potassium ascorbate page? Hmm. Gzuufy ( talk) 18:20, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
I need some help to flesh out the article and to iron out all the creases. So far, I've distinguished between two usages of the term scandium hydride. I want to avoid making the page just a list of facts, and include some discussion. Plasmic Physics ( talk) 13:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
"The h- sc (Hydrogen- Scandium) system" by F. D. Manchester and J. M. Pitre. They discuss the material in the context of the lanthanide hydrides, which do appear to be prominent materials. Good luck, -- Smokefoot ( talk) 13:43, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
An IP has been changing SMILES in drug/chemboxes; as far as I see, the main changes are from aromatic atoms (lowercase) to double bonds, eg. here. Could someone have a look at these changes? (I'm sorry to say I haven't got enough time at the moment.) Thanks, ἀνυπόδητος ( talk) 11:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
This article is in desperate need of attention from editors with good biological and chemical backgrounds, and prioritization of such may be hindered by its assignment of a "low" importance tag by this Project team.
I would note that a google search of the term gives ≈2,600,000 results, where the wikipedia article is the first. The Project team might compare the interest in this subject—which includes the health-related "hot" topics of the antioxidant properties of plant-derived polyphenols, e.g., from grapes used in red wine manufacture, various bramble polyphenol such as raspberry ellagitannins—with other higher priority articles, to see if this is a fair assessment of outside interest. Cheers. Leprof 7272 ( talk) 05:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
The Algarot article mixes up things so I wanted to move it or rename it. Algarot is most likely either a mixture of SbOCl with Sb4O5Cl2 or pure Sb4O5Cl2. So the article might be best be put as chapter into an article about antimonyoxychlorides.
Any suggestions before I start to move things around?-- Stone ( talk) 13:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at Talk:Mephedrone#Racemate.3F? User:Jü pointed out a while ago that the illustrations in the chembox are incorrect and got round to changing them this week but has been reverted. I'm not sure which is correct and hopefully someone here knows what's best! SmartSE ( talk) 12:52, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I know there have been quite a few folks making skeletal structure SVGs on request, but I'm not certain who is currently active and doing so. I also know that I'm awful at this. I created this image of the structure of calostomal (and/or its methyl ester) for my current article project, but it is clearly of terrible quality. If someone with some spare time would be willing to redraw that in a way that's presentable, I'd be especially grateful! Squeamish Ossifrage ( talk) 21:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't do SVGs, sorry. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 22:02, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Chemistry/Structure drawing is a good manual.-- Stone ( talk) 23:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
This AFD could use the input of a couple more chemists. ChemNerd ( talk) 13:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
P.G.Antolinos ( talk · contribs) moved phosphine to phosphane earlier today. I'm not sure whether this is correct or not. Could someone take a look? Thanks! SmartSE ( talk) 17:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Could you guys help with Special:Contributions/Skuhl2, please? -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 21:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/reactorgo/projects
-- Stone ( talk) 23:24, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone who raised concerns. I appreciate the interest and desire to ensure these articles have academic integrity and meet Wikipedia's standards. It has always been my intention these articles be a positive contribution to the Wikipedia community. This project is a voluntary honors project. When designing this project, we sought to provide detailed instructions and policy documentation to make sure the students had adequate opportunity to successfully complete drafting a quality Wikipedia article. As an honors Chemistry project we gave the students (working in peer groups) responsibility to complete their proposed final drafts at a level worthy of finial publication to Wikipedia. However, it has always been our intention these articles be reviewed prior to any submission for publication. Along with the review process, I have listed below the other steps we took to try to make this project a success. Please take a look at what our process has been. If you can recommend any improvements or changes to the the process to better meet Wikipedia's standards, please let us know. It would be very helpful.
We required the projects to be worked on entirely in the sandbox where we felt there would be no harm to Wikipedia or add additional work to other editors as the students learned to edit and gather information for their articles. (Part of the initiative was for the students to learn how they might contribute future articles, not just for this assignment.)
Our continued goal is the improvement and expansion of Wikipedia and exposing students to the Wikipedia process to hopefully encourage them to become continuing contributors to the Wikipedia project as a whole. Again, I appreciate your feedback and welcome any suggestions on this accounts talk page. Reactuiuc ( talk) 04:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Having cleaned up a few of these articles, I have a general comments:
With all that said, I felt that terrible image copyright violations notwithstanding, diamantane, User:Mkleinjan/sandbox and User:Aradi7/sandbox were quite nice.
Anyway, my suggestions for you are:
I hope this helps. -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 15:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
All (most) of your comments and suggestions are appreciated. My TA's and I are discussing how to best proceed from this point. You all have extensive experience in this forum and we will weight all of our decisions with that in mind. I am somewhat embarrassed that some of our students published articles that were awful. It was our intent that ALL articles would stay in the sandbox until either I, or one of the TA's, review the article and approve the move. We are discussing ways in which to control this much better in the future. We are just now reviewing the pages with grades in mind. It is obvious to me that we will have to be a larger presence in the process. This is a fantastic learning experience for the students, and as we learn and grow; so will the quality of the output for the benefit of all. TurfNakrion ( talk) 19:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Group 1 Lithium Cyanide, Cyanuric Triazide, Barium Metaphosphate
Group 2 copper oxalate, tungsten IV fluoride, and magnesium oxalate
Group 3 Glaucarubin , Salsoline, Azapiracid, 2-Aminofluorene, Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane, Ethiofencarb
Group 4- 4-Nitrobenzamide and diethyl succinate and 3-Aminobenzamide
Group 5 Nitropentaamminecobalt (III) chloride and 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene and N,N-Dimethyl-4-iodoaniline
Group 6 Lythranidine, Hydrocinnamic Acid, and Vobasan
Group 7 - Spiropyran , Choloropentaaminecobalt (III) Chloride, Bromopentaaminecobalt (III) Bromide, Methylmagnesium Bromide
Group 8 - allylcyclopentane, Bromoacetyl bromide, Benzestrol
Group 9- 1,2,4-Trimethylcyclohexane, Lead (II) Oxalate, 4-Fluorobenzoic acid
Group 10- Cysmethynil, Crufomate, and Mucobromic Acid
Group 11 - Phenylethanolamine, Allyl cyanide, Acetyl cyanide
Group 12 - Niobium (V) Ethoxide, Tantalum (V) Ethoxide, Monobutyltin Trichloride
Group 13- barium cyanide, beryillium sulfide, cadmium chromate, Lithium Chromate
Group 14 - methoxymethyl fluoride, User:Ajchancellor/sandbox, (1R,3R)-1,2,3-trimethylcyclopentane
Group 15 - L-β-Homoleucine hydrochloride, Homoarginine
Group 18 - Calcium perchlorate , Calcium nitrite , 2-Bromobutyric acid
Group 19 - Nitroethylene, Acetaldoxime, diamantane, N-Hydroxypiperidine
Group 20 - Acetylcholine bromide, Glycine Hydrochloride, Anpirtoline Hydrochloride, 2,3,5-trimethyl pyrazine
Group 21 - Sodium stannate, bromine azide, sodium tetrasulfide
Group 22 - Nickel selenide, Strontium oxalate, Manganese (II) phosphate
Group 23 -
Nickle(II) Sulfide,
propargyl bromide,
ammonium carbamate, [
|hydroxycitronellal]
Group 24 - Rifalazil, 2'-fucosyllactose, 2-Butenoic Acid, 1,4-Bis(diphenylphosphino)butane
Group 25 - Dodecene, Tetramethylammonium Perchlorate, Quintozene, Barium hexafluorosilicate, Potassium ethoxide
Group 26- Diisopropyl Methylphosphonate, 2-Butynediamide (Cellocidin), Glyceryl Hydroxystearate , Aspergillic Acid, Visnagin, Aminocarb
Group 28-Safrole, Anthranilic Acid, and phosphorus pentachloride
Group 29- ethyl bromodifluoroacetate Ethyl Bromodifluoroacetate[ [10]] Pentafluorobenzoic acid[ [11]] 5-Bromouridine
? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.80.19 ( talk) 15:42, 2 December 2012 (UTC)